Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articlesrss feeds
Finance special: how the 2024 budget is impacting family law
Sarah Higgins, Charles Russell Speechlys LLPSarah Jane Boon, Charles Russell Speechlys LLPMiranda Fisher, Charles Russell Speechlys LLPCharlotte Posnansky, Charles Russell Speechlys LLPThe Budget of...
The deprivation of liberty of children: what can we do better?
Pippa Pudney, Barrister, Spire BarristersThis article explores the principles of care for children deprived of their liberty including the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory’s recent recommendations...
When two worlds collide: the 1970 Hague Evidence Convention and the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention
Dr Onyója Momoh, Barrister, 5 Pump Court ChambersMost will agree that the relationship between the 1996 and 1980 Hague Conventions is a match made in heaven. However, the intersection of the 1970...
Familial relationships following a traditional surrogacy arrangement
Mary Welstead, Visiting Professor in Family law University of BuckinghamIn January 2024, Theis J declined to discharge a child arrangements order for contact between a surrogate mother and a...
Practical enforcement
James Snelus, No 5 ChambersA look at some of the problems that can be encountered when enforcing financial remedy orders.  The article is not a comprehensive overview of enforcement but after a...
View all articles
Authors

President sets out how the Court of Protection should handle deprivation of liberty applications

Sep 29, 2018, 22:02 PM
court of protection, family law, cheshire west, deprivation of liberty, DoL, Re X and Others (Deprivation of Liberty) [2014] EWCOP 25
Title : President sets out how the Court of Protection should handle deprivation of liberty applications
Slug : president-sets-out-how-the-Court-of-Protection-should-handle-deprivation-of-liberty-applications
Meta Keywords : court of protection, family law, cheshire west, deprivation of liberty, DoL, Re X and Others (Deprivation of Liberty) [2014] EWCOP 25
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Aug 7, 2014, 04:18 AM
Article ID : 106663
Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division, has today handed down the long-awaited post-Cheshire ruling, setting out how the Court of Protection should handle deprivation of liberty applications

In his judgment, Re X and Others (Deprivation of Liberty) [2014] EWCOP 25, Sir James Munby emphasises that his decision is not an analysis of the Cheshire West decision, but is instead focused on the 'very significant increase in the number of cases in the Court of Protection relating to deprivation of liberty'.

'The immediate objective, in my judgment, is to devise, if this is feasible, a standardised, and so far as possible ‘streamlined’, process, compatible with all the requirements of Article 5, which will enable the Court of Protection to deal with all DoL cases in a timely but just and fair way. The process needs, if this is feasible, to distinguish between those DoL cases that can properly be dealt with on the papers, and without an oral hearing, and those that require an oral hearing.' (para [5])
At the initial directions hearing on 8 May 2014, Sir James Munby, with the assistance of counsel, formulated 25 questions as to how the Court of Protection should handle deprivation of liberty applications. 

In Re X, the President's preliminary judgment, he addresses most of his questions, concentrating on the issues directly related to his 'streamlining' objective.

The full judgment, including the 25 question Annex, is available to download here.  

An in-depth analysis of the judgment, by Jess Flanagan of Clarke Willmott, will be published by Family Law shortly.

Categories :
  • News
Tags :
key_lock
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Load more comments
Comment by from