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 Court of Protection held that managing Direct Payments is not covered by standard property and affairs deputyship and requires specific mixed authority.
The authority of welfare deputies is limited to the specific powers positively conferred by the deputyship order; decisions about internet and social media use are not included unless expressly stated. The Court of Protection retains the power to make best interests decisions even where a deputy has authority and is willing to act. It is not in XY's best interests to vary the deputyship order to include authority over internet and social media use at this time.
Source excerpt
XY, In the Matter Of [2025] EWCOP 55 (T2) (06 March 2026)
The Court of Protection held that welfare deputies did not have authority over XY’s internet and social media use, and refused to vary the order.
Calderdale MBC v AB & Ors (Order) [2021] EWCOP 56 (06 August 2021)
The Court of Protection held that a property and affairs deputy’s standard authority does not include decisions about an adult’s care and support needs under s.32(4)(a) Care Act 2014.
The Court of Protection held that a property and affairs deputy’s general authority does not include conducting litigation, though it can cover limited preparatory advice in some property and affairs matters.
Explore more
