Re D (A Child: deprivation of liberty) [2015] EWHC 922 (Fam)

Parental responsibility and DOL "I am satisfied that the circumstances in which D is accommodated would amount to a deprivation of liberty but for his parents' consent to his placement there. I am satisfied that, on the particular facts of this case, the consent of D's parents to his placement at Hospital B, with all of the restrictions placed upon his life there, falls within the 'zone of parental responsibility'. In the exercise of their parental responsibility for D, I am satisfied they have and are able to consent to his placement. In the case of a young person under the age of 16, the court may, in the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction, authorise a deprivation of liberty."

Essex

This case has been summarised on page 6 of 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 55, April 2015).

Essex search

This case's neutral citation number appears in the following newsletters:

• 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 62, February 2016)

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII

Subject(s):

• Deprivation of liberty - children🔍 See also: Category:Deprivation of liberty

Date: 31/3/15🔍

Court: High Court (Family Division)🔍

Judicial history:

When D turned 16:

• Re D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42
• Re D (A Child) [2017] EWCA Civ 1695
• Birmingham City Council v D [2016] EWCOP 8

When D was 15:

• Re D (A Child: deprivation of liberty) [2015] EWHC 922 (Fam)

Judge(s):

• Keehan🔍

Parties:

• Trust A🔍
• X🔍
• A Local Authority🔍
• Y🔍
• Z🔍
• D🔍

Citation number(s):

• [2015] EWHC 922 (Fam)^B
• [2015] MHLO 33

What links here:

• Birmingham City Council v D [2016] EWCOP 8
• Re D (A Child) [2017] EWCA Civ 1695
• 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 55, April 2015)
• Re D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42

Published: 31/3/15 22:47

Cached: 2024-12-19 12:41:53