An ICB v G & Ors [2024] EWCOP 13 (27 February 2024)

An ICB v G & Ors [2024] EWCOP 13 (27 February 2024)

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the behaviour of G's family, particularly LF, was intimidating, obstructive, and undermined G's care and safety, justifying restrictions on their involvement and continued placement in the care home. The family's allegations against the care home were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] EWCOP 13
Parties
Applicant: AN ICB; First Respondent: G (BY HER LITIGATION FRIEND, THE OFFICIAL SOLICITOR); Second Respondent: LF; Third Respondent: A Lead Operating Group; Fourth Respondent: GR; Fifth Respondent: CJ
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Court of Protection Welfare Proceedings / Fact Finding Hearing and Best Interests Determination
Outcome
Findings made against the family; restrictions on their involvement with G upheld; continued placement in care home approved as in G's best interests.
Legal Topics
Best Interests Determination, Fact Finding in Court of Protection, Covert Recordings as Evidence, Patterns of Coercive Behaviour, Injunctive Relief, Care Arrangements for Incapacitated Adults
Mental Capacity Law Health and Social Care Law Best Interests Determination Fact Finding in Court of Protection Covert Recordings as Evidence Patterns of Coercive Behaviour Injunctive Relief Care Arrangements for Incapacitated Adults

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AN ICB

Applicant

G (BY HER LITIGATION FRIEND, THE OFFICIAL SOLICITOR)

First Respondent

LF

Second Respondent

A Lead Operating Group

Third Respondent

GR

Fourth Respondent

CJ

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Court of Protection Welfare Proceedings / Fact Finding Hearing and Best Interests Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the behaviour of G's family, particularly LF, posed a risk of harm to G and undermined her care
  2. 2 Whether the allegations of intimidation, tampering, and breaches of injunctive orders by the family were substantiated
  3. 3 Whether the care home provided appropriate care and whether the family's allegations of abuse or neglect were substantiated

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the behaviour of G's family, particularly LF, was intimidating, obstructive, and undermined G's care and safety, justifying restrictions on their involvement and continued placement in the care home. The family's allegations against the care home were unsubstantiated and part of a pattern of behaviour aimed at disrupting the placement. Covert recordings were admissible as relevant evidence but did not support the family's case. The fact-finding framework must focus on patterns of behaviour and their impact on P's welfare, not just isolated incidents.

Court Disposition

Findings made against the family; restrictions on their involvement with G upheld; continued placement in care home approved as in G's best interests.

Orders

  • Approval of advanced care plan for G under section 16 Mental Capacity Act 2005
  • Continuation of injunctive orders restricting family conduct and contact