Re AB; AB v LCC (A Local Authority) (2011) EWHC 3151 (COP): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "{{bailii|" to "{{#bailii:") |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
==External link== | ==External link== | ||
{{bailii | {{#bailii:[2011] EWHC 3151 (COP)}} | ||
[[Category:Other capacity cases]] | [[Category:Other capacity cases]] |
Latest revision as of 23:42, 30 October 2016
There is no impediment to a RPR acting as a litigation friend to P in a s21A application provided that: (i) the RPR is not already a party to the proceedings; (ii) the RPR fulfils the COP rule 140 conditions (that he can fairly and competently conduct proceedings on behalf of P, and has no interests adverse to P's); (iii) the RPR can and is willing to act as litigation friend in P's best interests; and (iv) the procedure as set out in COP rule 143 is complied with. The judge set out the pros and cons of this course of action; in this case, he appointed the RPR to as P's litigation friend.
Other
AB (by litigation friend Natalie Wood) v (1) LCC (a Local Authority), (2) The Care Manager of BCH
Hearing: 2/11/11
Judgment: 6/11/11
Before: Mostyn J
Mr John McKendrick (instructed by Maxwell Gillott) for the Applicant
Mr Leon Stringer (instructed by a Local Authority) for the 1st Respondent
The 2nd Respondent appeared in person
Citations
[2011] All ER (D) 37 (Dec)