Re P [2010] EWHC 1592 (Fam)

Derek Paravicini's parents and sister (rather than any independent person) were made joint and several financial and welfare deputies, subject to (1) a condition under s16(5) to consult fully with the RNIB and the county council when considering a move of accommodation; and (2) a requirement under s19(9) to give notice to the public guardian in the event that his earnings exceed £150,000 a year, as at this point he could begin to contribute to the costs of his care while making a profit from a musical career.

Official summary

The following is an extract from Judiciary of England and Wales, 'Court of Protection Report 2010' (July 2011).

9. In the matter of P [2010] EWHC 1592 (Fam)B) (Mr Justice Hedley, 13 May 2010) The parents and sister of Derek Paravicini applied to be appointed as his deputies, both as to property and affairs and personal welfare. The Royal National Institute for the Blind raised two concerns about their application: one relating to his accommodation, and the other, the need possibly for an independent deputy in addition to the applicant family members.

Paragraph 9: “Therefore, the court ought to start from the position that, where family members offer themselves as deputies, then, in the absence of family dispute or other evidence that raises queries as to their willingness or capacity to carry out those functions, the court ought to approach such an application with considerable openness and sympathy.”

Paragraph 26: “First, I am satisfied that both parents and the sister are and ought to be appointed as deputies to deal both with welfare and financial issues so far as DP is concerned. I also think it particularly desirable that at least one deputy should be of the same generation as DP. Secondly, I do not think it necessary that there should be an independent deputy appointed as the anxieties that give rose to a consideration of an independent deputy are, in my judgment, sufficiently met in the consideration that the court has given to the matter.”

Paragraph 28: “Next, I propose to use my powers under section 19(9) to require the deputies to give notice to the public guardian in the event that DP’s earnings should exceed the sum of £150,000 a year.”

Paragraph 29: As regards whether the appointment should be joint or joint and several, the judge said: “There are obvious difficulties here when one starts to reflect carefully on what is at stake. It is obviously desirable that in a case like this, the deputies should have the power to act severally. … So I simply propose at this stage to direct that the deputies are empowered to act jointly and severally and they have to be trusted either to operate in agreement or, if there is serious disagreement on a material issue, to refer that matter to the public guardian or the court.”


[2010] 2 FLR 1712B

Duplicate Bailii citation number: [2010] EWHC 1592 (COP)B

External link



Independent: Secret court open to public gaze after Independent campaign - 14/5/10