Information for "Re NS (2016) NIFam 9"
Basic information
Display title | Re NS [2016] NIFam 9 |
Default sort key | Re NS (2016) NIFam 9 |
Page length (in bytes) | 1,570 |
Page ID | 8803 |
Page content language | en - English |
Page content model | wikitext |
Indexing by robots | Allowed |
Number of redirects to this page | 2 |
Counted as a content page | Yes |
Page protection
Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
Edit history
Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
Date of page creation | 21:29, 23 February 2017 |
Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
Date of latest edit | 13:48, 21 September 2021 |
Total number of edits | 6 |
Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Page properties
Transcluded templates (10) | Templates used on this page:
|
SEO properties
Description | Content |
Article description: (description )This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | "This case relates to an elderly lady, NS. She has been represented by the Official Solicitor (OS) throughout these proceedings. ... The case therefore first came to court when the Trust sought to place NS in a residential facility after the hospital admission in May 2016. This was at a time when a stay in hospital was no longer required. The issue in the case was really whether NS should be discharged to a residential facility or to the care of MS with a care package. ... This case therefore involves consideration of a number of questions which I summarise as follows: (i) Is the patient incapable of making a decision regarding the particular issue put before the court? (ii) If so is the plan/treatment proposed in the best interests of the patient? (iii) Is the intervention necessary and proportionate pursuant to Article 8 of the ECHR? (iv) If the plan involves a deprivation of liberty under Article 5 of the ECHR should that be authorised by the court and if so under what terms regarding duration and review?" |