court of protection and deprivation of liberty safeguards case law update - neil ward - september...

28
Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding & MCA Court of Protection case law updates

Upload: browne-jacobson-llp

Post on 04-Jul-2015

61 views

Category:

Healthcare


2 download

DESCRIPTION

Neil ward looks at the cases and implications of: WCC v GS - how to manage ‘contact contracts’ Manchester City Council v G & E & F - cost penalties for ‘unreasonable’ approach to Court of Protection cases. PH v A Local Authority & Z Limited & R - role of expert and factual witnesses on assessing capacity.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

Deprivation of Liberty

Safeguarding & MCA

Court of Protection case law

updates

Page 2: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

WCC v GS – how to manage ‘contact contracts’

Manchester City Council v G & E & F - cost penalties for ‘unreasonable’

approach to Court of Protection cases

PH v A Local Authority & Z Limited & R - role of expert

and factual witnesses on assessing capacity

Page 3: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

WCC v GS

83 year old female

Dementia Hospital for cellulitis

Visited by son

Inappropriate behaviour Discharged

Care home WCC issued proceedings

Managing contact

Page 4: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

capacity to decide where

to live?

should she live at the

care home?

how to manage contact?

Page 5: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

capacity to decide where

to live?

should she live at the

care home?

how to manage contact?

Page 6: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

does not have capacity

to decide

should live in care home

review behaviour of son

Page 7: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

No extensive fact-

finding investigation

Don’t need a costly &

resource heavy

hearing

Behaviour was

inappropriate

Son refused

to sign

Page 8: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011
Page 9: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011
Page 10: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011
Page 11: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

LA costs learn

ing d

iffi

cult

ies

pla

ced in r

esi

denti

al

unit

in A

pri

l 2009

no c

onta

ct

wit

h

care

r fo

r fi

ve m

onth

s

unla

wfu

lly d

epri

ved

of

libert

y

LA o

rdere

d t

o p

ay

cost

s of

pro

ceedin

gs

indem

nit

y b

asi

s

Page 12: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

learn

ing d

iffi

cult

ies

pla

ced in r

esi

denti

al

unit

in A

pri

l 2009

no c

onta

ct

wit

h

care

r fo

r fi

ve m

onth

s

unla

wfu

lly d

epri

ved

of

libert

y

LA o

rdere

d t

o p

ay

cost

s of

pro

ceedin

gs

indem

nit

y b

asi

s

family costs

Page 13: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

learn

ing d

iffi

cult

ies

pla

ced in r

esi

denti

al

unit

in A

pri

l 2009

no c

onta

ct

wit

h

care

r fo

r fi

ve m

onth

s

unla

wfu

lly d

epri

ved

of

libert

y

LA o

rdere

d t

o p

ay

cost

s of

pro

ceedin

gs

indem

nit

y b

asi

s

official solicitor costs

Page 14: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

learn

ing d

iffi

cult

ies

pla

ced in r

esi

denti

al

unit

in A

pri

l 2009

no c

onta

ct

wit

h

care

r fo

r fi

ve m

onth

s

unla

wfu

lly d

epri

ved

of

libert

y

LA o

rdere

d t

o p

ay

cost

s of

pro

ceedin

gs

indem

nit

y b

asi

s

LA costs

Page 15: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

LA costs learn

ing d

iffi

cult

ies

pla

ced in r

esi

denti

al

unit

in A

pri

l 2009

no c

onta

ct

wit

h

care

r fo

r fi

ve m

onth

s

unla

wfu

lly d

epri

ved

of

libert

y

LA o

rdere

d t

o p

ay

cost

s of

pro

ceedin

gs

indem

nit

y b

asi

s

Page 16: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

• No order as to costs

• Judge may depart if

circumstances justify

Conduct before and after

proceedings and at court

Has a party succeeded in

the case?

Page 17: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

Court of Appeal

“a Judge has a feel of a case the Court of Appeal

cannot hope to replicate” and would only

intervene if the Judge had done something

“seriously wrong”

Court of Appeal found Judge had not done

anything “seriously wrong” and so upheld

Court costs decision

Page 18: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

Court of Appeal

“Local Authorities who have

done their job properly and

abide by the law have

nothing to fear”

Page 19: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

Court of Appeal

“very difficult judgments” and the Court

was not going to impose costs burden on

Local Authorities “just because hindsight

demonstrates it got judgments wrong”

Local Authority had a “blatant

disregard” of the Mental Capacity Act

Page 20: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

Arguments by Local Authority

that MCA was complex, and

staff had not been trained, were

dismissed (ignorance is no

excuse)

Page 21: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

Court accepted may have needed

a hearing anyway but it would

have been “significantly shorter”

had the Local Authority acted

differently

Page 22: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011
Page 23: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011
Page 24: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

PH V LA

49 year old male

Huntingdon’s disease

Standard Authorisation

Capacity?

Expert said yes

3 treating clinicians said no

Court

Page 25: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

Dr Rickards' expertise is not questioned but report

seemed to Judge “somewhat superficial” …

… Overall expertise of the treating clinicians gave “greater experience of PH as a patient”

than expert …

… accepted their evidence that PH had no true

insight into what it would be like to return home

Page 26: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011
Page 27: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

• http://bjp.rcpsych.org/

• www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk

• http://www.bailii.org

• www.bjlegaltraining.com

• www.law-less-ordinary.com

• www.brownejacobson.com

Page 28: Court of protection and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards case law update - Neil Ward - September 2011

[email protected]

0121 237 3927