The grounds of appeal against Keehan J's judgment in 2016 were that he:
- had erred in law in finding that a parent cannot consent to arrangements for a child who has attained the age of 16 which would otherwise amount to a deprivation of liberty;
- had erred in law in finding that the arrangements for D were attributable to the state;
- was wrong to find that D was deprived of his liberty "having regard to the procedures which ensure that the arrangements for 16 and 17 year old children, including those who lack capacity, are appropriately monitored."
Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii