Summary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Cheshire West and P & Q
By Laura Davidson
The Supreme Court judgment in P & Q and P v Cheshire West has finally been handed down. P & Q (otherwise known at first instance as Re MIG and MEG  EWHC 785 [Fam]) involved two sisters. MIG was 18 years of age and was placed with a loving foster family. MEG was 17 years of age and was one of four residents in a small residential placement. They both had severe learning disability and required high levels of support. MEG was at times aggressive and was prescribed medication to allay her anxiety. The girls were transported to and attended college. For their own safety, both would have been prevented from leaving their placements had they so attempted, and they were under continuous supervision and control. Both girls appeared content in their environments and did not seek to leave.
Mrs Justice Parker held that neither girl was deprived of their liberty because of the ‘relative normality’ of their placements, and the fact that the restrictions would have been the same wherever they lived, as the relevant comparator was someone with the same complex difficulties. The fact that the purpose of the restrictions was benign was also held to be relevant to the decision whether or not they were being deprived of their liberty. The official solicitor appealed, and the Court of Appeal upheld Parker J’s decision…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the No5 Chambers briefing.
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
Where is the boundary between assistance and being in the arena, and how does the internet impact on that?
Helen Barney discusses the landmark Employment Appeal Tribunal case concerning holiday pay of Bear Scotland & others v Fulton & Ors, Hertel (UK) Ltd v Mr Woods & Ors and Amec Group Ltd v Mr Law & Ors.