Proceedings relating to the P were adjourned for several months because of the Covid-19 pandemic which meant that he could not return to his habitual residence in Spain.
Judgement, following an earlier extempore judgment by Hayden J, concerning the framework of applicable law where the Court is faced with making an anticipatory decision that may result in the deprivation of P’s liberty should they lose a capacity in the future, where the matter was urgent and where the health of an unborn child was also at stake.
Judgment on preliminary issue concerning jurisdiction in proceedings relating to QD, diagnosed with Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s who was living with his second wife (KD) in Spain but who flew back to the UK in the company and his son (TD) and daughter (BS) without the wife’s knowledge. They subsequently applied for a range of orders relating to QD’s care that are opposed by KD.
The High Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction and authorised a deprivation of liberty in respect of the capacitous P.
Sir James Munby ruled that proceedings in relation to 16 and 17 year children who were subject to care orders and DOLs should remain in the Family Court and not be transferred to the Court of Protection.
The latest in a series of applications, this one alleging that the President did not have jurisdiction to make judgment in EWCOP16  and that it should be withdrawn from public record. The application was refused.
Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii
The meaning of s1(3) of the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 had to be interpreted so that a decision could be made as to whether an application for a variation of a trust, one of whose beneficiaries was a 10 year autistic boy, should be heard in the High Court or the Court of Protection.
Case summaries on every Court of Protection case & other relevant decisions with links to the full judgment where available.
Free email alert
Get the latest cases & news delivered to your inbox with our free email updates.
Useful books from Bath Publishing