Nottinghamshire County Council v SV & Anor [2025] EWCOP 37

Judgment in long running proceedings primarily concerning whether a fact finding hearing is required

The hearing arose out of concerns that SV, a 63 year old man with learning disabilities, was being abused by his husband, MB, and whether a fact finding hearing was required to investigate those claims. It was agreed that SV lacked capacity to conduct the proceedings, where to live and to decide contact with MB.

In this judgment, Lieven J assesses SV's wishes and feelings with regards to his relationship with MB and concludes only gradual, supervised contact should be allowed. She then analyses the law regarding fact finding hearings in the Court of Protection which she notes [48] are relatively rare and states at [55] that to go ahead then the

"facts which are sought to be found must have a direct impact on the welfare decisions that need to be made in respect of P. The fact finding must be "necessary" for the determination of those welfare decisions. The fact finding exercise must be proportionate to the issues that need to be determined. In determining proportionality, the likely cost to public funds, the time taken and the impact of delay on P are all relevant considerations."
​
In the circumstances of these proceedings, where SV is living in care away from MB and he is settled there, it would be neither necessary nor proportionate to conduct a hearing. Although they are married and any order that limits or prevents their contact is an interference in their Article 8 ECHR rights, it is a balanced right, and the interference can be justified.

Read the judgment on BAILII