VA, Re (Medical Treatment) [2023] EWCA Civ 1190 (13 October 2023)

VA, Re (Medical Treatment) [2023] EWCA Civ 1190 (13 October 2023)

The Court of Appeal held that the judge's analysis of the medical evidence, the lack of clear evidence of VA's wishes, and the burdens of further invasive treatment justified the decision to authorise extubation and palliative care as being in VA's best interests. The process was fair and there was no breach of ECHR rights. Permission to appeal was granted but the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Civ 1190
Parties
Appellant: VK; First Respondent: Hospital Trust; Second Respondent: VA (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Court of Protection (medical Treatment, Best Interests) / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Best Interests Decision Making, Withdrawal of Life Sustaining Treatment, Mental Capacity Act 2005, Court of Protection Procedure, Human Rights (echr Articles 2, 6, 8), Costs in Welfare Proceedings
Mental Capacity Law Medical Law Human Rights Law Best Interests Decision Making Withdrawal of Life Sustaining Treatment Mental Capacity Act 2005 Court of Protection Procedure Human Rights (echr Articles 2, 6, 8) +1 more

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

VK

Appellant

Hospital Trust

First Respondent

VA (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Court of Protection (medical Treatment, Best Interests) / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Protection judge erred in law or procedure in authorising extubation and palliative care for VA, a patient lacking capacity, rather than tracheostomy and continued life-sustaining treatment.
  2. 2 Whether the process afforded the family a fair opportunity to participate and whether there was a breach of ECHR rights.
  3. 3 Whether the judge's assessment of VA's wishes and feelings and best interests was adequate.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the judge's analysis of the medical evidence, the lack of clear evidence of VA's wishes, and the burdens of further invasive treatment justified the decision to authorise extubation and palliative care as being in VA's best interests. The process was fair and there was no breach of ECHR rights. Permission to appeal was granted but the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • No order as to costs (save Trust to pay 50% of Official Solicitor's costs).
  • Stay of extubation order until 4pm on 20 October 2023 to allow application to Supreme Court.