View source for Re DP: Public Guardian v John Marney (2014) EWCOP 7, (2014) MHLO 69

"The Senior Judge concluded that JM was in breach of his fiduciary duties as an attorney and that he had "behaved in a way that has both contravened his authority and has not been in DP's best interests. ... At the end of the day the issue is really very simple. Why should JM be protected from the normal consequence of a judicial finding of misconduct, namely the identification of the wrongdoer in a published judgment? Nothing JM has said, or which could sensibly be put forward on his behalf, provides any reason why, looked at from his perspective, he should be spared the consequences of his misbehaviour. If publication of his identity and re-publication of the Senior Judge's findings, lowers JM in the estimation of right-thinking readers of the Daily Mail or other organs of the media, then so be it. He has only himself to blame. Why should JM be any more entitled to anonymity, just because the only judicial finding thus far has been made by the Court of Protection, than he would be if his self-same conduct was being considered in the Chancery Division or the Crown Court? ... In these circumstances, and with all respect to the Senior Judge, the balance comes down heavily and decisively in favour of the public being told who JM is; in favour of the Daily Mail and others being free to identify him as the person referred to by the Senior Judge in his judgment. JM is John Marney."

==Related judgments==
[[Re DP: Public Guardian v John Marney (2014) EWCOP 7, (2014) MHLO 69]]
*[[Re DP (Revocation of LPA): OPG v John Marney (2014) EWHC B4 (COP), (2014) MHLO 8]]

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2014) EWCOP 7}}


[[Category:Other LPA cases]]
[[Category:No summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2014 cases]]