CT v London Borough of Lambeth & Anor [2025] EWCOP 6 (T3)

Appeal arising from a dispute over CT's capacity to decide on residence and care  

CT, in his fifties, has a long history of drinking and significant multiple medical and psychological conditions. Facing discharge after a period in hospital in 2024, there was disagreement between the LA and the Trust over his capacity to make decisions about care and residence. The LA assessment was that he did have capacity whereas the Trust wished to place him in a care home and deprive him of his liberty. The judge below ruled he lacked capacity. The LA and the OS appealed on three grounds, namely, that the judge: set too high a bar in considering the relevant information CT needed to consider; had incorrectly considered CT's mental impairments first, not his ability to weigh information; and had not fully appreciated a change in the factual matrix.

The Vice President, Theis J, allows the appeal on all three grounds noting the judge had conflated the two stage test set out in A Local Authority v JB [2021] UKSC 52 and at [57] noting 

"In effect, the Judge's conclusion on the first stage was determined by CT's mental impairment and not by resolving the key evidential dispute in respect of the functional test."

While not "wanting to add to the growing industry of checklists", she also sets out at [60] a checklist for those involved in assessing capacity, adapted from one supplied by counsel in the case. 

Read the judgment on Bailii