The pages below are initially ordered according to the dates on which they were added to the site (most recent first). The order can be changed by clicking on the symbol beside a column heading: click on the symbol beside "Page and summary" for alphabetical order; click beside "Categories" for the order in which the cases were reported. Click on the arrow symbol again to reverse the order. Click on a page name to view the relevant page.
| Page and summary | Date added to site | Categories |
| SSNI, Re Judicial Review (Oswald Brown) (2006) NIQB 94 — It was lawful for the hunger-striking prisoner, who lacked capacity, to be given nutrition.
| 2010-01-12 | 2006 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Northern Irish cases, Transcript |
| Re Allen (2009) COP 21/7/09 — Under MCA 2005 s4(7) any best interests decision-maker "must take into account, if it is practicable and appropriate to consult them, the views of" various categories of individuals. Where any attempt at consultation will inevitably be unduly onerous, futile, or serve no useful purpose, it cannot be in P’s best interests, and it would be neither practicable nor appropriate to embark on that process in the first place.
| 2009-12-14 | 2009 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, No transcript |
| Law Hospital NHS Trust v Lord Advocate (1996) ScotCS CSIH 2 — "The purpose of these proceedings is to obtain the sanction of the court to the termination of nutrition and hydration and all other life sustaining treatment to a patient at Law Hospital." [Summary required.]
| 2009-11-30 | 1996 cases, Best interests, No summary, Scottish cases, Transcript |
| Re RB (A Child) (2009) EWHC 3269 (Fam) — Transcript of judge's sentencing remarks, endorsing the parties' agreement that administration of a large dose of sedative, the removal of the ventilation tube and consequent death (rather than discharge from hospital on home ventilation after a tracheostomy) were in the baby's best interests.
| 2009-11-16 | 2009 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| DCC v KH (2009) COP 11729380 — (1) A DOLS standard authorisation was sufficient to return P on the long journey from contact sessions to the residential accommodation: the Code of Practice paragraphs saying that conveyance may require a court order only apply where no SA is in place. (2) It was inappropriate to seek an anticipatory declaration for the use of force, as MCA 2005 s5 and s6 permitted restraint. (3) The interim residence order should be enough to persuade the police to facilitate P's return.
| 2009-11-12 | 2009 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| NHS Hospital Trust v A (a child) (2007) EWHC 1696 (Fam) — Bone marrow transplant on baby lawful despite parents' refusal to consent.
| 2009-10-29 | 2007 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| KD and LD v LB Havering (2009) EW Misc 7 (EWCOP) — At a hearing which was expected to be merely interlocutory, the DJ made final orders as to capacity and residence, and appointed the local authority as personal welfare deputy. (1) The power to deal with cases summarily exists but was exercised unlawfully in this case. It is to be exercised as an alternative to a hearing, for example in an emergency or where little or no contest is anticipated. It is unlikely to be exercised appropriately where there is a serious issue or potential issue as to the appropriateness of deprivation of liberty and so where Articles 5 and 6 are potentially engaged. The DJ had achieved an impermissible hybrid, in the course of a hearing exercising powers potentially available to the Court instead of a hearing. (2) A summary decision of best interests must be made by reference to the evidence and the matters in MCA 2005 s4, but this exercise was not fully carried out. (3) There was a breach of procedural fairness and Article ..→ | 2009-10-29 | 2009 cases, Best interests, Detailed summary, Transcript |
| ITW v Z (2009) EWHC 2525 (Fam) — Statutory will case. [Summary required.]
| 2009-10-19 | 2009 cases, Best interests, No summary, Transcript |
| Bury Metropolitan Borough Council v D (2009) EWHC 446 (Fam) — It was lawful for the local authority to remove a child from its mother immediately at birth without informing the mother of its intentions.
| 2009-10-08 | 2009 cases, Best interests, Detailed summary, Transcript |
| Re GC (2008) EWHC 3402 (Fam) — (1) The principle governing State intervention under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 is the same as under the Children Act 1989, namely that the State does not interfere in the private family life of an individual unless the continuance of that private family life is clearly inconsistent with the welfare of the person whose best interests the court is required to determine. (2) The closer the person is to having capacity the more weight his views are to be given. (3) Contrary to the professional evidence, it was in GC's best interests to return home as an interim measure: this decision was reached having regard to (a) the concept of least intervention, (b) GC's consistently-expressed wishes and feelings, (c) a finding that a trial at home was necessary and now was the best time, and (d) the importance of the emotional, as opposed to physical, component of best interests to very elderly (or young) people.
| 2009-08-15 | 2008 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| W Primary Care Trust v TB, Re Brammall (2009) EWHC 1737 (Fam) — TB was eligible to be deprived of her liberty under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (either under DOLS provisions or s16 court order): she might have been ineligible under Case E, but she was not a "mental health patient" because her care home did not fall within the definition of a hospital.
| 2009-07-23 | 2009 cases, Best interests, Deprivation of liberty, Detailed summary, Transcript |
| Re OT (2009) EWHC 633 (Fam) — OT, a nine-month-old baby, required continuous ventilation to live, and sometimes required further intensive medical treatment; the trust wanted to discontinue ventilation and treatment on the basis of the distressing and futile nature of the treatment; the parents wanted all steps to be taken to sustain life. (1) Although the application itself was made in an emergency as a result of a sudden deterioration in the child's condition, the parents had a fair opportunity to prepare their case both before and during the hearing; there was therefore no flaw in the process breaching Convention rights. (2) The provision or withdrawal of treatment for a child without parental consent, save in exceptional cases, is unlawful without a court declaration.* (3) Declarations were made permitting the clinicians to treat OT according to their clinical discretion (including not escalating treatment) and to cease ventilation immediately.
| 2009-05-21 | 2009 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| Re OT (A Child) (2009) EWCA Civ 409 — The judge's refusal of the parents' adjournment application, and the decision to proceed with a determination of best interests of their child, was not appealable.
| 2009-05-18 | 2009 cases, Best interests, No summary, Transcript |
| NHS Trust v T (2004) EWHC 1279 (Fam) — The patient lacked capacity, based on medical opinion and the content of her advance directive refusing treatment; interim declaration made that blood transfusion in emergency would be in patient's best interests.
| 2009-04-12 | 2004 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| R (Burke) v General Medical Council (2005) EWCA Civ 1003 — Artificial nutrition and hydration.
| 2009-04-12 | 2005 cases, Best interests, No summary, Transcript |
| R (Burke) v General Medical Council (2004) EWHC 1879 (Admin) — Artificial nutrition and hydration.
| 2009-04-12 | 2004 cases, Best interests, No summary, Transcript |
| G v Official Solicitor (2006) EWCA Civ 816 — When considering a statutory will, the function of the court is to do for the patient what the patient would fairly do for herself, if she could and acting with the benefit of advice from a competent solicitor; on the facts, including the family disputes, she would have appointed the independent receiver as executor of her estate. [Caution.]
| 2009-04-12 | 2006 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| Re F (Adult Patient) (2000) EWCA Civ 3029 — Court's jurisdiction.
| 2009-04-12 | 2000 cases, Best interests, No summary, Transcript |
| C v V, Re S and S (Protected Persons) (2008) EWHC B16 (Fam) — (1) Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, there is a presumption in favour of implementing P's wishes unless they are irrational, impractical, or irresponsible (with reference to resources), or there is a sufficiently countervailing consideration. (2) The appointment of donees jointly (rather than jointly and severally) under a power of attorney created the presumption that the donors wanted decisions made jointly or by neither appointee. (3) Mr and Mrs S's wishes (that if both daughters were unable to act jointly then neither should act singly) would be implemented, and an independent Deputy would be appointed.
| 2009-02-22 | 2008 cases, Best interests, Detailed summary, Transcript |
| St Helens Borough Council v PE (2006) EWHC 3460 (Fam) — In cases involving the doctrine of necessity a declaration in the form of "it is lawful, being in [PE's] best interests..." is appropriate, as it is the best interests of the vulnerable adult which determine lawfulness; however, in other circumstances under the inherent jurisdiction a bare declaration in the form of "it is in [PE's] best interests..." is appropriate.
| 2009-01-17 | 2006 cases, Best interests, Brief summary, Transcript |
| A v A Health Authority (2002) EWHC 18 (Fam) — The nature of the case determined the court in which a case concerning the welfare of children or incompetent adults should be litigated: the review of a decision of a public authority by way of JR in the Admin Court; best interests cases in the Family Division. In best interests proceedings the court cannot compel a public authority to exercise its public law functions in a certain way.
| 2008-12-30 | 2002 cases, Best interests, Detailed summary, Transcript |
| Re A (Medical Treatment: Male Sterilisation) (2000) 1 FLR 549, (2000) 1 FCR 193 — It would not be in the best interests of A, who lacked capacity to make the decision, to be sterilised, while the current level of supervision continued; best interests are not limited to best medical interests but encompass medical, emotional and all other welfare issues.
| 2008-12-30 | 2000 cases, Best interests, Detailed summary, Transcript |
| Re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) (2000) EWCA Civ 254 — (1) The operation to separate Siamese twins, both of whom would otherwise shortly die, would clearly be in Jodie's best interests, but would kill Mary; the court must perform a balancing exercise in determining what was in the twins' best interests, regardless of the parents' religious objections; the scales come down heavily in Jodie's favour. (2) The operation would be lawful in criminal law, under the doctrine of necessity, and as the primary purpose was not to kill Mary
| 2008-12-30 | 2000 cases, Best interests, Detailed summary, Transcript |