View source for Re MW; LB Hammersmith and Fulham v MW (2012) MHLO 82 (COP)

''(1) MW lacked capacity to make decisions in relation to contact with his childhood friend JC. (2) It was not in MW's best interests for JC to visit MW's home, so an order was granted restraining JC from doing so; this was endorsed with a penal notice because of previous breaches of an injunction. (3) The local authority and Official Solicitor's requested that MW, who lacked litigation capacity, should not attend the hearing because this would be stressful and not conducive to the maintenance of his good mental health: the court acceded to this application. (4) Sensitive evidence was withheld from JC, at the request of the local authority and Official Solicitor, but the court came to its final decision based on the open evidence.''

==Other==
Date: 29/7/12

Before: Horowitz QC

Miss Kirby (instructed by the Local Authority) appeared for the Applicant

Mr Chisholm (instructed by Irwin Mitchell) appeared for the First Respondent

The Second Respondent appeared in person.

==Citations==
Case no 11620762

==Thanks==
{{thanks|Carter, Oliver|Irwin Mitchell Solicitors}}

==External link==
{{#bailii:no ncn}}

[[Media:Re MW; LB Hammersmith and Fulham v MW (2012) MHLO 82 (COP).pdf|Transcript]]

[[Category:Best interests]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2012 cases]]
[[Category:Judgment available on MHLO]]