Page values for "LJ v Mercouris (2019) EWHC 1746 (QB)"

"_pageData" values

_creationDate2019-07-06 10:29:26 PM
_modificationDate2019-07-23 3:46:09 PM
_creatorJonathan
_categories2019_cases Cases Judgment_available_on_Bailii Litigation_capacity_cases Other_capacity_cases
_isRedirectNo
_pageNameOrRedirectLJ v Mercouris (2019) EWHC 1746 (QB)

"News" values

Which_tableCases
RSS_title
RSS_description
RSS_pubdate2019-07-06 10:25:38 PM

"Cases" values

SentenceLitigation friend
Summary"The essential questions are: (1) Does Mr [J] lack capacity within the meaning of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. (2) Is the court satisfied that Mrs [J] satisfies the conditions in Rule 21.4 (3). This requirement is incorporated by Rule 21.6 (5). The main function of a litigation friend appears to be to carry on the litigation on behalf of the Claimant and in his best interests. However, part of the reasoning for imposing a requirement for a litigation friend appears also to be for the benefit of the other parties. This is not just so that there is a person answerable to the opposing party for costs."
Detail
SubjectLitigation capacity cases Other capacity cases
Judicial_history
Judicial_history_first_page
Date2019-07-05
JudgesStewart
PartiesAlexander Mercouris LJ
CourtHigh Court (Queen's Bench Division)
NCN[2019] EWHC 1746 (QB)
MHLR
ICLR
Essex
Other_citations
Cites
External_links
Judgment