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
The High Court authorised ST’s deprivation of liberty, holding the restrictions were necessary and proportionate while a step-down plan and wider care arrangements were progressed.
The Court of Protection held that AR’s supported living placement was not a deprivation of liberty under Article 5 ECHR, despite substantial restrictions and supervision.
The consents given by O’s father to the restrictions and supervision in O’s care, school, and respite arrangements fall within the zone of his parental responsibility, are in O’s best interests, and therefore do not amount to a deprivation of liberty requiring court authorisation. The application for authorisation is unnecessary and dismissed.
Source excerpt
Bristol City Council v CC & Ors [2026] EWCOP 19 (T3) (30 April 2026)
The Court of Protection made final declarations on CC’s capacity, held his care arrangements amount to a deprivation of liberty, and authorised ongoing best-interests care plans.
The Court of Protection made capacity declarations for CC, authorised his current care arrangements as a deprivation of liberty, and continued a transparency order.
SJ lacks capacity to conduct proceedings, manage diabetes, and make decisions about care and support due to schizophrenia-related delusional beliefs and avolition. She has capacity to decide where to live only between options assessed as meeting her needs. The risks of a trial at home are unacceptably high and cannot be mitigated; continued residence at Z Placement with current care is in her best interests. Deprivation of liberty is necessary, proportionate, and authorised.
Source excerpt
Court of Protection case on a vulnerable adult’s habitual residence, travel to Spain, best interests, deprivation of liberty authorisation, and financial deputyship.
PX lacks capacity to make relevant decisions; MX's contact must be supervised due to risk of emotional harm; PX should reside with FX during holidays; no restrictions on FX's contact; DOLs and permission requirement orders are justified to protect PX's welfare.
Source excerpt
The High Court authorised a short deprivation of liberty for a highly vulnerable child, BA, to enable transfer from an inappropriate hospital setting to a children’s home with education and therapy.
BA (A Child), Re (DOLS in Hospital) [2026] EWHC 653 (Fam) (20 March 2026)
The High Court authorised BA’s deprivation of liberty briefly in hospital to permit transition to a children’s home, stressing the need for education and suitable provision.
Explore more
