There was a dispute as to whether the conclusions of a second independent expert psychiatrist should be accepted, and final declarations made in accordance with those conclusions.
An NHS Trust was seeking the court's consent for the harvesting of peripheral blood stem cells from the P so they can be donated to her mother who has chronic leukaemia. Consent was granted.
The court had to decide whether the P had capacity to decide where he resides, the care he receives, to have contact with others and access to the internet and social media. The court concluded that he did have capacity to make those decisions.
The Trust was seeking an order declaring that the P lacks the capacity to consent to the medical treatment for cancer and further, that it was in her best interests to undergo a combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy.
Application for declarations and orders for the P to undergo medical treatment, against his wishes, in relation to the insertion of a PEG. The declarations were made.
Appeal against a declaration that the P had capacity to consent to sexual relations. The appeal was allowed, the declaration set aside and the matter was remitted to the judge for reconsideration.
Application by a hospital trust for a declaration as to the capacity of Q, a 57 year old woman with epilepsy, regarding conduct of the proceedings and decisions about her dental treatment, and a best interests decision concerning how treatment should proceed.
Application brought by the Local Authority seeking declarations and orders to enable safeguarding of AW, a 35-year old man living in residential care placement but where there are concerns about his capacity to decide on sexual relationships and other matters.
The court had to decide if the P has capacity to make the decision as to whether she should continue to live in residential care or return to live in her own flat with a care package.
The LA considered that the P lacked the capacity to make decisions about contraception and, in view of her obstetric history and current presentation, her treating team considered that it was in the P's best interests to have an intrauterine contraceptive device inserted at the time of her caesarean section in order both to reduce the risk of an unplanned future pregnancy and to enable family spacing. The court made the order sought.
Case summaries on every Court of Protection case & other relevant decisions with links to the full judgment where available.
Sign up for our free email alert
We do not share your details with any third parties and you can unsubscribe at any time
Useful books from Bath Publishing