2 Replies to “Happy birthday MCA!

  1. Thanks Alex. I’d have included Neary but I’m not sure which case I’d have dropped instead.

    I was interested in your point about H&W deputyship being seen by the Courts as ‘exceptional’ in the light of MCA s5. Why doesn’t the same point apply to P&A deputyship as well? Is it that P&A decisions are (generally) more straightforward – food has to be purchased, bills have to be paid etc? Or is it because the H&W and P&A provisions have different histories?

    1. Good point about Neary!
      I think in terms of P&A deputyship, it’s a combination of history, and also of the fact that there’s not the equivalent of s.5 MCA which gives a ‘general authority’ to address property and affairs matters, so it’s necessary to get formal authority from the Court of Protection.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.