Deprivation of liberty: current approach leaves vulnerable clients with limited protection
By Laura Davidson
In P and Q v Surrey County Council & Others  EWCA Civ 190, the Court of Appeal approved Parker J’s suggested new ‘relative normality’ test for assessing whether or not someone was being deprived of their liberty.
If someone’s disabilities and difficulties necessitate assistance that is a significant interference in their life regardless of where they reside, then they are living a relatively normal life ‘for them’. Thus the circumstances are unlikely to amount to a deprivation.
This concept purports to emanate from Engel v Netherlands (1976) 1 EHRR 647, despite its focus on the limitations of the army regime upon a soldier’s lifestyle, rather than a person’s individual characteristics…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the No5 Chambers briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from No5 Chambers
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from No5 Chambers
There is always an employment law dimension in Queen’s Speeches, and this one is no different, says Mugni Islam-Choudhury.
$5m suit may succeed if fans can prove boxer failed to disclose an injury.