X, Re (Rev 2)

X, Re (Rev 2)

AY's approach to X's diet and treatment is not supported by reliable medical evidence and places unworkable demands on carers. Restriction of diet and requirement for supplements are not in X's best interests. Decisions should be made collaboratively by responsible clinicians and carers. AY's welfare deputyship is revoked as her conduct is not in X's best interests.

Parties
Applicant: A. Y.; First Respondent: Hertfordshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust; Second Respondent: Norfolk County Council; Third Respondent: X (by his Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Welfare Application Under Mental Capacity Act / Final Judgment
Outcome
AY's welfare deputyship revoked; no replacement deputy appointed; X's diet and treatment to be determined by responsible clinicians; unrestricted diet permitted.
Legal Topics
Deputyship, Best Interests, Dietary Treatment, Autism, Revocation of Deputyship
Mental Capacity Health Law Family Law Deputyship Best Interests Dietary Treatment Autism Revocation of Deputyship

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 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. Y.

Applicant

Hertfordshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

First Respondent

Norfolk County Council

Second Respondent

X (by his Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Welfare Application Under Mental Capacity Act / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether X's diet should be restricted and supplemented as proposed by AY
  2. 2 Whether AY's welfare deputyship should be restored or revoked
  3. 3 Whether X's bowel condition warrants dietary exclusion and supplements

Ratio Decidendi

AY's approach to X's diet and treatment is not supported by reliable medical evidence and places unworkable demands on carers. Restriction of diet and requirement for supplements are not in X's best interests. Decisions should be made collaboratively by responsible clinicians and carers. AY's welfare deputyship is revoked as her conduct is not in X's best interests.

Court Disposition

AY's welfare deputyship revoked; no replacement deputy appointed; X's diet and treatment to be determined by responsible clinicians; unrestricted diet permitted.

Orders

  • Revocation of AY's welfare deputyship under s16 Mental Capacity Act 2005
  • No appointment of replacement welfare deputy