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
Resolutions Model Assessment tool – the widening gap between use by parties and application by the courts
Trisan Hyatt, Family Law Barrister, 5 Pump Court ChambersIona Gallagher, Pupil Barrister, 5 Pump Court Chambers The Resolutions-Model Assessment is most often used in care proceedings where there...
NCDR and finding solutions collaboratively
Sarah-Jane Riddell, Solicitor, Collaborative Lawyer and Mediator, Family Law Partners This article provides an introduction to the collaborative process including how it works, when it...
Adoption in the context of surrogacy arrangements
Rose-Marie Drury, Principal Associate and LLP, Mills & ReeveColin Rogerson, Head of Fertility Law, Mills & ReeveParental orders have always been seen as the gold standard order to obtain...
‘What’s in a name?’
Mary Welstead, Visiting Professor in Family law University of BuckinghamIn Re C, Cobb J explained the importance of a name for a child’s identity; a Local Authority could only rename a child...
Breaking down barriers: creating family law seminars where there are no ‘stupid questions’
Jamil Mohammed, Junior Barrister, 33 Bedford RowChristina Warner, Barrister, 33 Bedford RowThe Family Law Breakfast Club was launched in January 2024 to provide junior members in family practice with...
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