CL v Swansea Bay University Health Board & Ors [2024] EWCOP 22 (17 April 2024)

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2024] EWCOP 22
Parties: Applicant: CL; 1st Respondent: Swansea Bay University Health Board; 2nd Respondent: LL (by his litigation friend, AB); 3rd Respondent: VL; 4th Respondent: Swansea City Council
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 17 April 2024
Procedural Posture: Court of Protection Appeal / Appeal From Order Discharging Deputyship
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Deputyship, Statutory Interpretation, Best Interests, Discharge of Deputyship, Section 16 Mental Capacity Act 2005

Mental Capacity Law Public Law Deputyship Statutory Interpretation Best Interests Discharge of Deputyship Section 16 Mental Capacity Act 2005

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2

Parties

Applicant

Swansea Bay University Health Board

1st Respondent

LL (by his litigation friend, AB)

2nd Respondent

3rd Respondent

Swansea City Council

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Court of Protection Appeal / Appeal From Order Discharging Deputyship

Legal Issues

1 Whether a deputyship order can be discharged under s16(7) MCA 2005 on best interests grounds, or only under s16(8) for specified conduct
2 Whether the judge erred in law in discharging the deputyship order under s16(7)
3 Whether the judge failed to conduct a proper best interests analysis

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that s16(7) MCA 2005 provides a general power to discharge a deputyship order on best interests grounds, and is not limited by s16(8), which sets out specific but non-exhaustive circumstances relating to the deputy's conduct. The judge's decision to discharge the deputyship was justified as the majority of decisions were now before the court or no longer required a deputy, and maintaining the deputyship would be disproportionate and not the least restrictive option.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Permission to appeal granted on all grounds
Appeal dismissed; order of HHJ Porter-Bryant discharging the deputyship is upheld

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.