A recent case reads as an object lesson in how not to make an application to the Court of Protection to authorise deprivation of liberty, writes Alex Ruck Keene.

The Administrative Court has revisited the issue of the denial of social care support to persons subject to immigration control, and the line between local authority social care support under the Care Act 2014, and accommodation and support provided by the Home Office. Jonathan Auburn analyses the ruling.

Hope Davis-McCallion examines how the Court of Protection approached deciding whether a woman had capacity to make decisions about the management of her diabetes. In Royal Borough of Greenwich v CDM [2019] EWCOP32, the court had to decide whether the assessment of capacity to make decisions about diabetic management is one macro-decision which encompasses all of the many micro-decisions that CDM…

The Court of Protection team at 39 Essex Chambers analyse the second in two rulings by Mr Justice Cobb on the inherent jurisdiction.

Mr Justice Cobb recently handed down two important decisions on the scope of the inherent jurisdiction at the border of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. In the first of two articles on these rulings, the Court of Protection team at 39 Essex Chambers examine a case concerning a young adult and the use of the inherent jurisdiction to authorise deprivations of liberty where there is no statutory…

The Supreme Court has handed down a much-anticipated judgment on 16-17 year olds, deprivations of liberty and parental consent. Alex Ruck Keene explains the ruling and sets out some practical implications.

Christine Cooper reports on an unusual inherent jurisdiction case that recently went before a High Court judge.

The Court of Protection team at 39 Essex Chambers report on the outcome of a ruling dealing with streamlined Re X applications made by two local authorities.