Hearing to decide how and when the P could transfer from a care home to the home of her parents.
The court had to determine whether it was in the P's best interests to remain away from his family home and, indeed, to move to a new placement, or for him to return to his family home and their care.
The court had to decide whether the P, who was about to be discharged from a neuro-rehabilitation unit, should live in the marital home or a residential care home. A marital home trial was agreed.
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.
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.
Further decision following a court ruling that the P should not leave the care home to live with his daughter.
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.
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.
The court had to decide where the P should live as his foster placement was coming to an end.
P appeal against a range of orders relating to her use of social media and consent to sexual relations. LA's cross-appeal against a decision that the P had capacity to decide on where she lived. Appeal dismissed, cross-appeal allowed.
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