Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection

This paper argues that, properly analysed, the common law and the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) march hand in hand with the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (‘MCA 2005’) so as to impose a set of requirements on litigation friends acting for the subject of applications of pro...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ruck Keene, Alex, Bartlett, Peter, Allen, Neil
Format: Article
Published: Oxford University Press 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/33625/
_version_ 1848794668660162560
author Ruck Keene, Alex
Bartlett, Peter
Allen, Neil
author_facet Ruck Keene, Alex
Bartlett, Peter
Allen, Neil
author_sort Ruck Keene, Alex
building Nottingham Research Data Repository
collection Online Access
description This paper argues that, properly analysed, the common law and the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) march hand in hand with the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (‘MCA 2005’) so as to impose a set of requirements on litigation friends acting for the subject of applications of proceedings before the Court of Protection (‘P’) which are very different to those currently understood by practitioners and the judiciary. The authors examine critically current practice and procedures and provide a set of proposals for reforms.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T19:19:51Z
format Article
id nottingham-33625
institution University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T19:19:51Z
publishDate 2016
publisher Oxford University Press
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling nottingham-336252020-05-04T18:24:48Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/33625/ Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection Ruck Keene, Alex Bartlett, Peter Allen, Neil This paper argues that, properly analysed, the common law and the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) march hand in hand with the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (‘MCA 2005’) so as to impose a set of requirements on litigation friends acting for the subject of applications of proceedings before the Court of Protection (‘P’) which are very different to those currently understood by practitioners and the judiciary. The authors examine critically current practice and procedures and provide a set of proposals for reforms. Oxford University Press 2016-12-22 Article PeerReviewed Ruck Keene, Alex, Bartlett, Peter and Allen, Neil (2016) Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection. Medical Law Review, 24 (3). pp. 333-359. ISSN 1464-3790 Best interests; Capacity; Court of Protection; Legal representation; Litigation friends https://academic.oup.com/medlaw/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/medlaw/fww016 doi:10.1093/medlaw/fww016 doi:10.1093/medlaw/fww016
spellingShingle Best interests; Capacity; Court of Protection; Legal representation; Litigation friends
Ruck Keene, Alex
Bartlett, Peter
Allen, Neil
Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection
title Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection
title_full Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection
title_fullStr Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection
title_full_unstemmed Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection
title_short Litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'P' before the Court of Protection
title_sort litigation friends or foes?: representation of 'p' before the court of protection
topic Best interests; Capacity; Court of Protection; Legal representation; Litigation friends
url https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/33625/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/33625/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/33625/