MA & Anor, Re

It is in both MA and AA's best interests to remain at their current placements and not have any form of contact at this stage, as neither derives benefit from contact and contact causes distress. The cessation of contact is necessary and proportionate to protect MA's best interests and does not breach Article 8 ECHR.

Parties: First Applicant: MA; Second Applicant: AA; First Respondent: A Local Authority; Second Respondent: An ICB
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 20 November 2024
Procedural Posture: Section 21 a Application Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 / Judgment
Outcome: Application for contact refused; declaration of breach of Article 8 not granted.
Legal Topics: Best Interests, Deprivation of Liberty, Article 8 ECHR, Care and Residence, Contact Arrangements

Mental Capacity Human Rights Health Law Best Interests Deprivation of Liberty Article 8 ECHR Care and Residence Contact Arrangements

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 14 Party arguments 2

Parties

First Applicant

Second Applicant

A Local Authority

First Respondent

An ICB

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Section 21 a Application Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 What are the available options for care and residence for MA and AA?
2 Which care and residence options are in MA's and AA's best interests?
3 What are the available options for contact between MA and AA?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for contact refused; declaration of breach of Article 8 not granted.

Orders

MA and AA to remain at their current placements.
No contact between MA and AA at this stage.