View source for Re G (TJ) (2010) EWCOP 3005

The court considered the meaning of 'best interests' when deciding whether or not to direct a deputy to make maintenance payments from P's funds to her daughter. (1) The balance sheet of facts which P would draw up if he had capacity to make the decision (taking into account actual wishes, beliefs and values, and other factors) is a relevant factor for the court's decision: thus a substituted judgment can be subsumed into the consideration of best interests. (2) 'Best interests' does not only include the self-interest of P: it includes wishes (or those he would have formed had he capacity) even if altruistic and not self-interested, and even if P has no awareness of the fact that such wishes are being respected. (3) On the facts: (a) no weight would be given to the possibility that P might be thought to have done the 'right thing', principally because she could not participate in the decision in any way, and partly because the family disagreed about what was the right thing; (b) overall, given the absence of any countervailing factors, respect for what would have been P's wishes defined what is in her best interests; (c) the order for maintenance payments was made.

==Official summary==
{{COP2010|25}}

==Other==
Judgment: 19/11/10

Hearing date: 10/11/10 

Before: Morgan J

Miss Barbara Rich (instructed by Mullis & Peake LLP) for the Deputy

Mr David Rees (instructed by the Official Solicitor) for the Official Solicitor as litigation friend for G

Mr Michael King (instructed by Harcus Sinclair) for C

==Citations==
[2010] All ER (D) 218 (Nov)

==External link==
{{#bailii:[2010] EWHC 3005 (COP)}}

[[Category:Best interests]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2010 cases]]