| Display title | Re SM: Peterborough City Council v Mother [2024] EWHC 493 (Fam) |
| Default sort key | Re SM: Peterborough City Council v Mother (2024) EWHC 493 (Fam) |
| Page length (in bytes) | 1,277 |
| Page ID | 16200 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Page image |  |
| Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 13:09, 6 February 2025 |
| Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 13:09, 6 February 2025 |
| Total number of edits | 1 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 1 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 1 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | The High Court decided that SM was not deprived of her liberty under Article 5 because the reason that she could not leave was her profound disabilities rather than any action of the State (whether by restraining her or by failing to meet the a positive obligations to enable her to leave). She was both physically incapable of exercising her right to liberty, and mentally incapable of asserting it. The Supreme Court in Cheshire West did not deal with the situation of a child such as SM who is incapable of leaving because of a combination of her physical and mental disabilities rather than by reason of any restraints placed upon her. The judge noted: "On a conceptual level it is difficult to see how one can be deprived of something that one is incapable of doing." This common sense approach will not be popular in the legal profession. |
