Accg & Anor v MN

The Court of Protection should not decide hypothetical questions about care options excluded by the local authority, as such determinations are outside its remit and relate to public law issues.

Parties: Respondent: ACCG; Applicant: Mr N; Applicant: Mrs N; Subject: MN
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 25 June 2014
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome: Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics: Best Interests Determination, Court of Protection Jurisdiction, Public Law Versus Private Law, Judicial Review

Family Law Mental Capacity Law Best Interests Determination Court of Protection Jurisdiction Public Law Versus Private Law Judicial Review

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

ACCG

Respondent

Mr N

Applicant

Mrs N

Applicant

Subject

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Court of Protection must determine best interests when options are excluded by local authority
2 Whether refusal to decide best interests denies procedural means to challenge local authority decisions

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Protection should not decide hypothetical questions about care options excluded by the local authority, as such determinations are outside its remit and relate to public law issues.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

Permission to appeal granted on grounds outlined