O v P & Anor

O v P & Anor

Given the rapidly changing regulatory environment, the recent Cass Review, and the inability of the private provider (Gender Plus) to comply with all recommendations, particularly national multi-disciplinary review, the court should adjourn rather than dismiss the proceedings to allow for completion of the young person’s assessment and possible future judicial consideration if genuine disagreement persists. The judge erred in finding no realistic basis for future court intervention.

Parties
Applicant/appellant (mother): O; 1st Respondent (father): P; 2nd Respondent (young Person): Q (by his children’s guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Family / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judge’s order set aside; proceedings adjourned.
Legal Topics
Children's Consent to Medical Treatment, Best Interests Jurisdiction, Gender Dysphoria Treatment, Inherent Jurisdiction, Section 8 Family Law Reform Act 1969, Mental Capacity Act 2005
Family Law Medical Law Children's Consent to Medical Treatment Best Interests Jurisdiction Gender Dysphoria Treatment Inherent Jurisdiction Section 8 Family Law Reform Act 1969 Mental Capacity Act 2005

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

O

Applicant/appellant (mother)

P

1st Respondent (father)

Q (by his children’s guardian)

2nd Respondent (young Person)

Procedural Posture

Family / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should adjourn or dismiss proceedings concerning medical treatment for a 16-year-old with gender dysphoria where there is parental disagreement and a rapidly changing regulatory environment
  2. 2 Whether the court should override or keep open the possibility of overriding the consent of a competent young person to cross-sex hormone treatment

Ratio Decidendi

Given the rapidly changing regulatory environment, the recent Cass Review, and the inability of the private provider (Gender Plus) to comply with all recommendations, particularly national multi-disciplinary review, the court should adjourn rather than dismiss the proceedings to allow for completion of the young person’s assessment and possible future judicial consideration if genuine disagreement persists. The judge erred in finding no realistic basis for future court intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judge’s order set aside; proceedings adjourned.

Orders

  • Proceedings adjourned to allow for completion of the young person’s assessment by Gender Plus.
  • No continuing orders in place; proceedings may be restored for further directions by either party.