The CCG were applying to the court for a personal welfare order that it was not in the best interests of the Patient, who was in a permanent vegetative state, for CANH to be continued. The order was granted.
Application by the Home Office for personal welfare orders to authorise collection and testing of blood samples and disclosure of medical records where the two patients were unconscious following a suspected nerve agent attack.
William J granted the orders commenting that:
"I am satisfied it is in the broad parameters of their best interests for it to be known as far as may be possible what occurred to them"
Read the judgment on Bailii.
This was a claim for a declaration under CPR Part 8 that it is not mandatory to bring before the Court the withdrawal of Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration ("CANH") from a patient who has a prolonged disorder of consciousness in circumstances where the clinical team and the patient's family are agreed that it is not in the patient's best interests that he continues to receive that treatment, and that no civil or criminal liability will result if CANH is withdrawn. The declaration was made in relation to this case only.
The Patient's son (with the support of the rest of the family) was seeking a declaration that it was not in his mother’s best interests that CANH should be continued, with the inevitable and foreseeable consequence that she would shortly thereafter die. The court concluded that it was not in her best interests; it followed that the discontinuance of the CANH treatment was therefore lawful.
The Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust was seeking a declaration that it was in the Patient’s (who is in a Minimally Conscious State (MCS)) best interests to receive clinical treatment including clinically assisted artificial nutrition and hydration (CANH). The application was refused.
The issue in this case was whether it was in the best interests of the vulnerable and sexually unaware Patient to administer contraception. The court held that it was.
This judgment considered whether legal proceedings were necessary when there was agreement between the Patient's family and her clinicians that CANH was no longer in her best interests. The judge concluded that they were not.
Application made by the Patient's mother for a declaration and order that it is in the Patient's best interests to receive stem cell treatment for his brain injury at a clinic in Belgrade in Serbia. Provisional consent was given although several further steps needed to be taken before the court gave its final approval.
The Patient was a Lance Corporal who was knocked unconscious in June 2013, while serving abroad, after being assaulted in a bar by another member of the regiment. He lacks capacity as a result of a traumatic brain injury. His mother was applying for a declaration and order that it is in his best interests to receive stem cell treatment for his brain injury at a clinic in Belgrade in Serbia. The application was opposed by the Official Solicitor, who has been appointed to act as the Patient's litigation friend in the proceedings, and by the MOD who are responsible for his care and treatment.
The court approved the application with the proviso that further steps needed to be taken first, saying that it was almost certain that the Patient will be much more than miserable if he is denied the opportunity to have stem cell treatment. His reaction would not be confined to mere "disappointment" - it was highly likely that he would demonstrate an adverse reaction in his behaviour which may significantly impede and delay his rehabilitation.
Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii
Application by NHS Trust for permission to undertake invasive, investigative procedures to diagnose whether the patient had cancer and, if necessary, urgent keyhole surgery on a patient who it was agreed lacked capacity.
The patient was in her 60’s and suffers from chronic paranoid schizophrenia. Hayden J allowed the application, partly because the patient had shown resilience in the past, the mental distress caused would be transitory and the treatment, if required, had a good chance of success. Rejecting the evidence of one of the experts involved he concluded that her “premise of a shorter life of better quality as against a longer life of pain and distress is, with respect to her, too absolute”.
He also reminded himself at  that under the framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, there is no constraint on the factors the court should take in to account when considering best interests.
Read the judgment on Bailii.
Mr Justice Jackson granted permission for an urgent operation to be performed on HN at an out of hours hearing.
Case summaries & Editor's comments on every Court of Protection case & other relevant decisions with links to the full judgment where available.
Get the latest cases & news delivered to your inbox with our free email updates.