David Lock KC asks whether a “longitudinal approach” to when decisions can lawfully be made by patients with fluctuating capacity is consistent with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (“the MCA”) and, if it is not, whether there is a better framework that could be used to enable decisions to be taken to protect this vulnerable class of persons using the inherent jurisdiction.

Holly Tibbitts examines new recommendations from a working group of the Civil Justice Council on determining capacity to litigate in civil proceedings.

There are some key provisions in the draft Mental Health Bill which are relevant and will have an impact on health and care providers and commissioners, writes Kirsty Stuart.

Yisroel Greenberg explores the circumstances in which an insolvency administration order should be considered, summarises the legal framework, and offers some practical suggestions when considering applying for one.

Lauren Gardner and Eleanor Suthern round up the latest Court of Protection cases of interest to practitioners, including an important ruling on representation during review periods.

Abby Watson provides practical tips on how representatives of protected parties can enhance communication, and prepare them for judicial visits.

Carlton Sadler and Siwan Griffiths look at the principal findings of the Dash and Richards reports into the Care Quality Commission and the Single Assessment Framework.

Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) examines a recent Ombudsman report following a complaint about the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation process.

Recent prosecutions by both the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Care Quality Commission (CQC) have brought forth issues which appear to be at the forefront of regulators’ minds. Freya Cassia and Beth Parlane identify developing trends which could help care and housing providers focus on improvements and address these issues.

Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) analyses a recent High Court case that considered the Human Rights Act in relation to outsourced care.

The Welsh Government has published a new Code of Practice which came into effect on 1 September and applies principles and standards to the commissioning of care and support services by local authorities, local health boards and NHS trusts in Wales. Emma Watt looks at the details.

A High Court judge has issued a really significant judgment for COPDOL work dealing with the ongoing representation of P during the time between a court authorisation of a deprivation of liberty and the next review, writes Ben Troke.

The Court of Appeal has found that there is no requirement for “belief” in the Mental Capacity Act functional test. Katie Viggers examines the ruling.

Barristers at 39 Essex Chambers analyse the outcome of a s.21A MCA application and contested hearing of whether it was in the best interests of MA, a 90-year-old woman with a diagnosis of dementia residing in a care home, to have a trial return to her home with a package of care.

The Upper Tribunal has, for the first time, provided detailed guidance as to the approach the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) (“the FtT”) should take when considering whether to make recommendations as to health and social care needs/provision in Education, Health and Care Plans (“EHC Plans”). Mark Greaves looks at the key points.

When is it in the best interests of an adult without capacity to be separated from her mother and covertly administered medication? A recent decision at the Court of Protection provides some guidance, writes Sarah Hutchinson.

How far can the Court of Protection go to ensure its orders are complied with? Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) examines a recent ruling.

In a recent ruling David Rees KC (sitting as a Tier 3 Judge of the Court of Protection) helpfully set out guidance as to what has to be done where there is a question of whether it has jurisdiction in a cross-border case. Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) examines the judgment.

A recent challenge to Birmingham City Council’s policy to charge disabled persons for services at the statutory maximum has failed. Joe Thomas explains why.

A local authority recently defended a Court of Appeal case focusing on how a local authority’s obligations under the Care Act 2014 interact with its obligations under Parts VI and VII of the Housing Act 1996. In particular, the Court of Appeal considered how s.23 of the Care Act should be properly interpreted, writes Joshua Swirsky.