Article 5 ECHR – DOLS authorisations
- So far as the editors are aware, this is the first publicly reported welfare case in which an IMCA has acted as litigation friend.
- The judge endorsed the approach taken at an earlier stage in the proceedings when the District Judge visited M in her care home. He noted that “A careful written record was made and placed with the papers. The visit has therefore had the dual purpose of informing the court of M's views and of making M feel connected to the proceedings without putting her into the stressful position of having to come to court in person. I commend this as an approach that may be of value in other cases of this kind.” The editors could not agree more, and hope that personal contact between the court and P, whether in court or in another setting, will become increasingly commonplace, particularly in cases where P’s incapacity is borderline or limited in scope, or where P has strong views about what should happen. And a small editorial point: it is common practice in Children Act cases to include in the title of the case a reference to the central issue. Given the alphabet soup nature of COP proceedings, it is extremely helpful – as here – to give an indication in the title of the case what it concerns.