Essex County Council v CVF (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeMrs Justice Lieven,Mrs Justice Lieven DBE
Judgment Date19 November 2020
Neutral Citation[2020] EWCOP 65
CourtCourt of Protection
Date19 November 2020
Docket NumberCase No: 12748362

[2020] EWCOP 65

COURT OF PROTECTION

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Before:

Mrs Justice Lieven

Case No: 12748362

Between:
Essex County Council
Applicant
and
CVF (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor)
First Respondent

and

JF
Second Respondent

and

Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust
Third Respondent

Ms Emma Sutton (instructed by Essex County Council) for the Applicant

Mr Rhys Hadden (instructed by the Official Solicitor) for the First Respondent

The Second Respondent represented herself

Ms Sophie Barbour (instructed by Hempsons) for the Third Respondent

Hearing dates: 19 November 2020

Approved Judgment

Mrs Justice Lieven Mrs Justice Lieven DBE
1

This is the final hearing in Court of Protection proceedings concerning CVF. CVF is a 29 year old woman who is represented by Mr Hadden acting on behalf of the Official Solicitor. The Local Authority, the applicant is represented by Miss Sutton, and the third respondent, which are responsible for delivering mental health services to CVF, is represented by Miss Barbour. CVF's mother, JF, who is the second respondent, represented herself.

2

JF requested in writing that the hearing be adjourned, in part as she is out of the country. I rejected this request as I agree with the Local Authority and the Official Solicitor that it is important that the proceedings come to an end due to the considerable anxiety they cause CVF. I have done all I can to ensure that JF could participate effectively today and I hope she feels that she has been able to do so.

3

The background to these proceedings is that CVF has diagnoses of diabetes, learning disability, emotionally unstable personality disorder, low self-esteem and feelings of abandonment. JF made a personal welfare application in January 2018. The application stated that CVF is a vulnerable women whose capacity to consent to sex, to make decisions in respect of contact with unknown men and to make decisions in respect of her care is in dispute and that it would benefit CVF for there to be clarity in relation to her capacity and whether any best interest decisions need to be made. At present … there is a high level of police intervention and numerous safeguarding referrals due to there being no agreed position on CVF's capacity”.

4

By order of HHJ Parnell on 10 August 2018, the Local Authority was substituted as applicant and the application was transferred to the High Court on 12 February 2019. I have been hearing the application since that transfer.

5

On 31 July 2019, I made final declarations made under section 15(1)(b) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (‘MCA 2005’) regarding CVF's capacity based on evidence provided by Dr Camden-Smith, the court appointed jointly instructed expert. The declarations that I made were that CVF lacks capacity to (i) conduct these proceedings, and to make decisions regarding (ii) her residence; (iii) her care and support needs; (iv) the contact she has with others; (v) her internet and social media use and (vi) her property and financial affairs. I also declared that CVF has capacity to (i) consent to sexual relationships and (ii) make decisions regarding her medication.

6

I also approved a care and support plan, which was before me on that date and authorised CVF's deprivation of liberty in her flat pursuant to section 4A(3) and section 16(2)(a) of MCA 2005 as it was agreed that CVF was under continuous supervision and control and was not free to leave her flat without support.

7

At the last hearing on 18 December 2019 the parties agreed that:

(1) CVF should continue to live in her flat on a long-term basis. Due to CVF's strong and consistent wish to remain in her flat, the parties agreed that it was unnecessary for further consideration to be given to CVF moving to supported living accommodation;

(2) An order was not needed regarding contact between CVF and JF;

(3) The restrictions upon CVF's use of the internet and social media set out in the internet, social media and smart phone enablement plan dated 31 July 2019 were in CVF's best interests.

8

I have had a number of hearings in this case and I have talked to CVF on a number of different occasions. I feel that I have a reasonably good sense of her, but obviously that is only within the court setting and all that implies.

9

There are three matters for me to deal with today:

1. Amount of care and support CVF needs.

2. Whether the Local Authority should substitute JF as CVF's deputy for property and affairs.

3. JF's application to be appointed as CVF's personal welfare deputy.

Background

10

There is a very long history to this matter before proceedings commenced. It is only fair to JF to record something of that history. Dr Camden-Smith, in her recommendations, says as follows:

“[CVF] is a vulnerable young woman. She has a poor sense of self identity and very low self-esteem; this is common in people with EUPD, and also in people with LD. She is overly sensitive to perceived criticism or rejection. She is highly suggestible.

People with EUPD often perceive things as opposing extremes. They often see things in black and white terms and will ‘split’ people and teams into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ in their own mind. Their inability to find a comfortable middle ground or hold two opposing views is a core feature of EUPD.

[CVF's] enmeshed relationship with her mother has contributed to her poor sense of self identity and her inability to advocate effectively for herself. [CVF] has clearly internalised her mother's views about her incapability of living independently or spending even the briefest period of time on her own. [CVF] seeks an external solution to her internal problem and does not recognise that she has any control of her internal or external experience. One of the solutions [CVF] clings to is the potential that the right medication will magically solve her difficulties.”

11

I note that this report was written over a year ago now, and that CVF has made considerable progress since then. CVF has a history of very severe mood and behavioural fluctuations as well as self-harm and risky behaviour. She also has a history of entering into what become exploitative relationships and needing to be ‘saved’ from those relationships. That is the background to the concerns that JF has to her safety and makes JF's worries about CVF and wish to protect her very understandable.

12

CVF has been living in her own flat and has at least in principle been provided with care on a 24/7 basis (15 hours during the day and then support overnight.) However, the level of care has in practice been reducing over the months and it is now not at that level of 24/7 care. I note that the gradual reduction entirely accords with Dr Camden-Smith's recommendations and her view that there needed to be a reduction in support to enable CVF to improve her own independent functional skills.

13

The final hearing has proceeded today by way of oral submissions and I have not heard oral evidence, but I have written evidence from CVF's social worker, TF, and from KC (her specialist mental health nurse). I also have a series of attendance notes from Miss Moore, acting as CVF's solicitor, through the Official Solicitor throughout these proceedings. All that material records the very great improvement in CVF's psychological and emotional wellbeing over the last few months. She has become much more stable in her moods and behaviour and has been functioning much better. In practical terms, CVF has started doing some paid work and she has become considerably more self-reliant with cooking, cleaning etc. CVF has also become more stable in her emotional regulation and is less blown around by particular events. It is important both to praise CVF for the great work and efforts she has made in what has been described in the papers as her “extraordinary improvements”, but to also be realistic that there have been ups and downs. Happily, the evidence suggests that CVF has been able to cope with those ups and downs far better than she had in the past.

14

JF has put in a detailed statement from herself as well as a statement from one of CVF's former carers (Miss J) and a...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT