C v V [2008] EWCOP B16 (25 November 2008)

C v V [2008] EWCOP B16 (25 November 2008)

The District Judge erred in law by failing to give due weight to the consistent and rationally expressed wishes of Mr and Mrs S that neither daughter should act alone as Deputy, and by giving undue weight to the supposed disadvantages of appointing an independent Deputy. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 requires that such wishes be given significant weight in the best interests assessment. There was no sufficient countervailing detriment to justify overriding those wishes. The appeal is allowed and an independent Panel Deputy is to be appointed.

Citation
[2008] EWCOP B16
Parties
Appellant: C; Respondent: V; Interested Parties: Mr and Mrs S
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Court of Protection Appeal / Appeal From Order Appointing Deputy
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Deputy Appointment, Best Interests, Capacity Assessment, Weight of Wishes of Incapacitated Persons
Mental Capacity Law Court of Protection Deputy Appointment Best Interests Capacity Assessment Weight of Wishes of Incapacitated Persons

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C

Appellant

V

Respondent

Mr and Mrs S

Interested Parties

Procedural Posture

Court of Protection Appeal / Appeal From Order Appointing Deputy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Judge erred in law by failing to give sufficient weight to the expressed wishes of Mr and Mrs S regarding the appointment of a Deputy
  2. 2 Whether the appointment of V as sole Deputy was in the best interests of Mr and Mrs S under the Mental Capacity Act 2005

Ratio Decidendi

The District Judge erred in law by failing to give due weight to the consistent and rationally expressed wishes of Mr and Mrs S that neither daughter should act alone as Deputy, and by giving undue weight to the supposed disadvantages of appointing an independent Deputy. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 requires that such wishes be given significant weight in the best interests assessment. There was no sufficient countervailing detriment to justify overriding those wishes. The appeal is allowed and an independent Panel Deputy is to be appointed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of DJ Rogers appointing V as Deputy set aside
  • Independent Panel Deputy to be appointed for Mr and Mrs S