The property and affairs deputy for the P was seeking authority for buccal cell samples to be taken from the P for the purposes of DNA testing to establish whether or not he was the father of each or any of three individuals. The application was granted.

The court agreed with the local authority who had adopted the decision and approach in not seeking to facilitate the P's contact with sex workers either here or abroad.

Declaration that the P, who was pregnant, should have a termination was set aside.

Application by an NHS Trust for an order in respect of a 24 year old pregnant woman who the Trust say lacks capacity and in whose best interests it is said to have a termination of pregnancy.

Application brought by an NHS Trust for declarations whether it is in JP's best interests to: i) deliver her baby via a Caesarean section under general anaesthetic; ii) to be transferred to hospital from her home in accordance with the transfer plan; and iii) not inform her of the outcome of these proceedings.

Judgment from the Vice President in three conjoined appeals concerning the correct approach to the appointment of Personal Welfare Deputies and whether the current law is confusing. 

Judgment concerning whether or not it is in the best interests that intubation should continue or should not continue to be provided.

Application to withdraw CANH from the P, who was in a persistent vegetative state, was allowed.

The P had been in a persistent vegetative state since 2011 after she sustained severe hypoxic brain damage following a cardiac arrest.  During the course of 2017, a number of meetings took place and it was reluctantly agreed by all those concerned that it was in her best interests for the CANH to be withdrawn. The judge had regard to Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James [2013] UKSC 67 (the purpose of the best interest test is to consider from the patient's point of view, where a patient is suffering from an incurable disability, the question is, in fact, whether they would regard their life as worthwhile or futile) and Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] UKHL 17.

The application was allowed. There was no prospect of recovery and no benefit would be derived from any further investigation or treatment. The judge was satisfied that on a best interests analysis, the evidence was sufficient to say that the P had, prior to her injury, expressed a strong wish in fact not to live a disabled and a dependent life.

Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii

Appeal against a decision which justified the P's deprivation of liberty was allowed.