Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Royal Free NHS Foundation Trust v EF & Ors [2025] EWCOP 52 (T3) (19 December 2025)
The Court of Protection held that EF lacked capacity and that moving him to supported living was in his best interests to ensure dialysis and medication.
RS, Re (Best Interests: Surgery and Intensive Care) [2025] EWCOP 38 (T3) (05 November 2025)
The Court of Protection held that it was in RS’s best interests to undergo spinal surgery with planned intensive care, heavy sedation and mechanical ventilation.
London NHS Trust v DT & Anor [2025] EWCOP 36 (T3) (21 October 2025)
The Court of Protection held that DT should be transferred to Country W for brain stem testing and, if indicated, withdrawal of treatment, applying the best interests test.
It is not in JP's best interests to continue to receive clinically-assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH). The treatment is futile, burdensome, and inconsistent with JP's values and wishes as reliably ascertained from his children and late partner. The medical evidence is clear that JP is in a permanent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery, and continued CANH would only prolong his current condition without benefit. The court is satisfied that withdrawal of CANH is lawful and appropriate.
Source excerpt
TIRE v Carmarthenshire County Council [2024] EWCOP 81 (T2) (02 December 2024)
The Court of Protection held that TE lacked capacity to decide where she should live and what care she needs, and that she should remain in residential care.
The Court of Protection held that SF lacked capacity to decide where to live and should remain at her current placement in England rather than move to Scotland.
Aberdeenshire Council v SF (No 4) (Residence) [2024] EWCOP 67 (T3) (21 November 2024)
The Court of Protection held that SF should remain at her current placement in England. The judge found she lacked capacity and that transition to Scotland carried too much risk.
The judge was entitled to conclude, after a lengthy and finely balanced process, that the continuation of covert medication and deprivation of A's liberty were no longer justified by the remaining medical benefits, given the significant infringement of A's autonomy and rights, the lack of progress over five years, and the unlikelihood of A ever consenting to HRT. The judge's decision to return A home, cease covert medication, and inform her of the covert treatment was within his discretion and supported by coherent reasoning, despite professional opposition. The process, though not ideal, was…
Source excerpt
DL lacks capacity to make decisions about her hydration and nutrition. The proposed ward-based NG tube feeding plan is unmanageable and presents a significant risk of psychological and physical harm to DL. The escalation plan—deep sedation and parenteral feeding in ITU—is in DL’s best interests as it minimises trauma, respects her wishes, and is the only realistic option to sustain her life.
Source excerpt
The judge took account of all relevant statutory and factual considerations, including J’s wishes, family views, and the FCDO advice, and reached a decision within the range reasonably open to her. The FCDO advice was not treated as decisive but as a significant factual counter-indicator. There was no error of law or approach, and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
