‘The Court of Appeal has held that it did not have jurisdiction to determine appeals against the President of the Court of Protection’s Re X rulings in which he sought to streamline procedures for dealing with certain types of deprivation of liberty cases.’
Local Government Lawyer, 16th June 2015
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Relatives of dementia sufferers who pass away in care homes are being forced to wait months to bury loved ones because of new rules.’
The Independent, 28th May 2015
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Law Society has today issued new guidance on deprivation of liberty safeguards (DOLS) to help lawyers meet an expected 10-fold surge in the number of legal challenges to DOLS over the coming year.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 9th April 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
In re AJ (Deprivation Of Liberty: Safeguards) [2015] EWCOP 5 ; [2015] WLR (D) 64
‘In situations involving a deprivation of liberty local authorities and professionals needed to be alert to cases where vulnerable people were admitted to residential care, ostensibly for respite care, when the underlying plan was for a permanent placement without proper consideration of their rights under article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 10th February 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘An elderly man suffering from dementia was treated like a “prisoner” after social workers dispatched him to a nursing home against his and his family’s wishes without going through proper legal processes, a formal investigation has found.’
Daily Telegraph, 28th January 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The Court of Protection has castigated the actions of a County Council in depriving an old person of his liberty and dignity in their overreaction to reports that he might be subjected to financial exploitation. This, said the judge, amounted to punishing the victim for the acts of the perpetrators.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd January 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Mostyn J has pulled no punches in rejecting an application for a declaration that an incapacitated person, being looked after in her own home, has been deprived of her liberty contrary to Article 5. There is a very full account of the judgment on the Mental Capacity Law and Policy blog so I will keep this summary short.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 21st November 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council v KW and others: [2014] EWCOP 45; [2014] WLR (D) 493
‘Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was not engaged where a person, often elderly, who was both physically and mentally disabled to a severe extent, was being looked after in her own home and where the arrangements had been made and paid for by a local authority rather than by the person’s own, or family, funds.’
WLR Daily, 18th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Further guidance on the approach to a “streamlined” process to deal with all deprivation of liberty (“DoL”) cases in a timely but just and fair way which was compliant with article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 16th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘At least seven times as many elderly and disabled people are being routinely restrained or locked up in care homes and hospitals as previously thought, new Government figures suggest. Councils have faced a surge in applications for legal clearance to deprive patients of their liberty following a landmark Supreme Court ruling earlier this year upholding the right of those deemed to lack mental capacity to the same basic freedoms as everyone else.’
Daily Telegraph, 2nd October 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘An application has been made to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal two key parts of a ruling by the President of the Court of Protection that was intended to streamline the handling of deprivation of liberty cases after the Cheshire West judgment.’
Local Government Lawyer, 30th September 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A judge has accused a county council of “a systemic failure” in a strongly-worded ruling in which he found the authority to have wrongfully deprived a 19-year-old autistic woman of her liberty and breached her human rights.’
Local Government Lawyer, 24th September 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Guidance given on the approach to a “streamlined” process to deal with all deprivation of liberty (“DoL”) cases in a timely but just and fair way which was compliant with article 5 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 7th August 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A woman was “unlawfully deprived of her” liberty and her right to family life breached when she was removed from her home by a local council, a judge has ruled.’
Daily Telegraph, 17th May 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The President of the Family Division of the High Court Sir James Munby predicts rush of claims from care home patients held in ‘cages’.’
Daily Telegraph, 8th May 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Mentally incapacitated people have the same rights to liberty as everyone else. If their own living arrangements would amount to a deprivation of liberty of a non-disabled individual then these would also be a deprivation of liberty for the disabled person. So says the Supreme Court, which has ruled that disabled people are entitled to periodic independent checks to ensure that the deprivation of liberty remains justified.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 8th April 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The dust is now beginning to settle, slightly, after the earthquake that was the decision of the Supreme Court in the conjoined appeals of Cheshire West and P and Q, which extends the criteria for determining whether living arrangements made for mentally incapacitated individuals amount to a deprivation of liberty.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 25th March 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024