Re UR: Derby City Council v NHS Derby and Derbyshire CCG [2021] EWCOP 10

Return to country of origin It was in UR's best interests to return to live with and be cared for by her family in Poland, rather than remain in her care home in England. The judge discussed coronavirus issues, cross-border considerations and habitual residence, and set out a checklist for guidance in similar cases.

Extract from judgment

57. I have delivered a judgment in this case which is lengthier and more detailed than I had originally contemplated. I have done so because I consider the preparation and presentation of this case, by all the disciplines involved, is a beacon of good practice. It should be regarded as a paradigm for professionals who find themselves considering similar situations in the future. It is invidious to single out any particular aspect of the case as particularly deserving of comment, but I do consider that the case management measures taken here are likely to be of wider and more general assistance in cases, in the Court of Protection, involving permanent relocation from the jurisdiction of England and Wales. Counsel submit, and I agree, that the following, non exhaustive, checklist is likely to provide useful guidance:

i. Liaison with the relevant Embassy/ Consulate (in the first instance) to ascertain what guidance and assistance can be provided;
ii. Evidence as to physical health to travel (GP);
iii. Evidence as to mental health to travel (psychiatrist);
iv. Legal opinion regarding citizenship, benefit entitlement, health and social care provision in the relevant country, and such other issues relevant to the case;
v. Consideration of any applications that need to be made as a consequence of any legal opinion provided;
vi. Independent social work evidence regarding the viability of the proposed package of care in the relevant country if such evidence cannot be provided by the parties to the proceedings or a direction under section 49 MCA;
vii. Confirmation of travel costings from the commissioners of the care package, both in relation to P and any carers that may need to travel with them (who will pay?);
viii. Confirmation that the necessary medication/ care will be available during travel from the UK/ for the immediate future in the new country
ix. Transition plan/ care plan, to include a contingency plan and how the matter should return to court in the event of an emergency in implementing the proposed plan;
x. Best interest evidence from the relevant commissioners;
xi. Wishes and feelings evidence;
xii. Residual orders to allow the plan to be implemented, including single issue financial orders regarding opening/closing of UK bank accounts, the purchasing of essential items to travel (if necessary);
xiii. Covid-19 considerations prior to travel (if applicable)

Essex search

This case's neutral citation number appears in the following newsletters:

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII

Subject(s):

Date: 28/1/21🔍

Court: Court of Protection🔍

Judge(s):

Parties:

  • UR🔍
  • Derby City Council🔍
  • NHS Derby and Derbyshire Clinical Commissioning Group🔍

Citation number(s):

What links here:

Published: 14/2/21 23:18

Cached: 2024-04-16 14:29:38

Retrieved from "https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/index.php?title=Re_UR:_Derby_City_Council_v_NHS_Derby_and_Derbyshire_CCG_(2021)_EWCOP_10&oldid=54677"