View source for Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWHC 1330 (COP)

''(1) The new care plan was in P's best interests (paras 35, 39). (2) There was a deprivation of liberty (reasons given in paras 58-60). (3) A costs order was made against the local authority as the serious misconduct of its employees (including misleading the court under oath, failure to disclose documents and falsifying records) rendered the proceedings more costly (para 76). (4) The public interest in holding public authorities accountable amounts to a 'good reason' for naming the local authority; the scale of the possible identification of P was minor enough not to prevent this (paras 89-90).'' 

==Related judgments==
*[[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]
:*[[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1333]]
::*[[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1257]] 
:::*[[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWHC 1330 (COP)]]
:*[[Re P and Q; P and Q v Surrey County Council; sub nom Re MIG and MEG (2011) EWCA Civ 190]]
::*[[Re MIG and MEG (2010) EWHC 785 (Fam)]]

==Citations==
[2011] EWHC 1330 (Fam), [2011] EWHC 1330 (COP)

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2011) EWHC 1330 (COP)}} 

[[Media:Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWHC 1330 (Fam).rtf|Transcript]]

[http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?id=7034 Local Government Lawyer, 'Misconduct by council employees in DoL case "seriously impeded" court process, says judge' (23/6/11)]

[[Category:Deprivation of liberty]]
[[Category:Best interests]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2011 cases]]