Warrington Borough Council v Y & Ors
[2023] EWCOP 27
DY (Capacity), Re
30 January 2024
[2024] EWCOP 4
Court of Protection
A young woman with learning disabilities and a difficult past was reassessed for her ability to make decisions for herself. At first, experts thought she couldn't, but later changed their mind after talking to her social worker and seeing how she was doing. The judge agreed that she CAN make these decisions now, but she might need help in the future.
Key Facts
- •DY, a 20-year-old woman with a learning disability and history of trauma, was expecting her first child.
- •The court previously determined DY lacked capacity to make various decisions regarding her welfare.
- •A reassessment of DY's capacity was conducted due to improvements in her presentation and engagement.
- •The central question was whether DY had gained capacity to make decisions about her residence, care, and contact with others.
- •Expert evidence from Dr. Camden-Smith initially indicated a lack of capacity, but later concluded DY had gained capacity in the relevant areas.
- •The court considered evidence from DY's social worker and Dr. Camden-Smith's reports and testimony.
Legal Principles
Presumption of capacity unless proven otherwise.
Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), s.1(2)
All practicable steps must be taken to help a person make a decision before concluding they lack capacity.
MCA, s.1(3)
An unwise decision does not equate to a lack of capacity.
MCA, s.1(4)
Capacity is time and matter specific.
MCA, s.2(1) and s.3(1)
In determining capacity, first identify 'the matter', then the 'information relevant to the decision'. Inability to decide must stem from impairment of, or disturbance in, mind or brain.
A Local Authority v JB [2021] UKSC 52, summarised in North Bristol NHS Trust v R [2023] EWCOP 5
Relevant information should be limited to salient factors, avoiding peripheral detail.
NK v RK and Others [2023] EWCOP 37
Guidance on relevant information for decisions about residence, care, and contact.
LBX v K, L and M [2013] EWHC 3230 (Fam)
Concerns regarding expert reports on capacity assessments (e.g., sufficient information provision, clear explanations for changes in opinion, adequate assistance to engage).
AMDC [2020] EWCOP 58
Outcomes
DY has capacity to make decisions about her residence, care needs, and contact with others.
The court considered Dr. Camden-Smith's revised opinion (after consultation with the social worker), social work evidence showing improvements in DY's engagement and understanding, and the overall evidence presented, concluding that the statutory presumption of capacity was not rebutted.
DY lacks capacity to conduct the legal proceedings.
This conclusion remained consistent throughout the process, based on Dr. Camden-Smith's assessment of DY's understanding of legal proceedings.