SS v London Borough of Richmond upon Thames [2021] EWCOP 31

Coronavirus vaccination (1) SS lacked capacity, owing to dementia, to decide whether to take a coronavirus vaccination, but consistently and volubly opposed it. (2) If she had capacity she should most likely would have refused: previously she had always attended to her medical welfare but resisted vaccinations. (3) It would not be in her best interests to persuade her by lying that her dead father had requested she take the vaccination. (4) It would not be in her best interests to administer it by force (sedation and restraint), as best interests requires evaluating welfare in a sense broader than merely epidemiological: SS would look to the carers to help, and they would not be able to intervene, which likely would dismantle the tentative trust that had been established over the months.


Published on Bailii on 19/5/21.

Essex search

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


Full judgment: BAILII


  • Medical treatment cases🔍
  • Coronavirus cases🔍

Date: 30/4/21🔍

Court: Court of Protection🔍



  • SS🔍
  • London Borough of Richmond upon Thames🔍
  • South West London CCG🔍

Citation number(s):

What links here:
  • No pages link to this page

Published: 23/5/21 14:20

Cached: 2024-04-21 20:05:10