header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

COVID-19: Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
06 May 2020 / Laura Davidson
Issue: 7885 / Categories: Features , Covid-19 , Human rights , Mental health
printer mail-detail
Credit: Gettyimages/iStockphoto

Laura Davidson discusses an urgent Court of Protection hearing held over Skype which demonstrates the powerful & competing rights & interests of care home residents lawfully deprived of their liberty during the coronavirus pandemic
  • BP v Surrey County Council and RP [2020] EWCOP 17 considered the ramifications of the current coronavirus pandemic for care home residents lawfully deprived of their liberty under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, and assessed BP’s best interests in terms of residence where his rights under Article 8 were being severely curtailed.
  • A subsequent permission hearing is also discussed ([2020] EWCOP 22). NB copy updated: 06 May 2020

BP, a former bookmaker, is 83 years old, deaf, and suffers from Alzheimer’s disease. Safeguarding concerns had been raised due to an allegation that his disease had caused him to be aggressive towards his wife, RP. He had been moved to SH care home as a self-funder in June 2019 following hospital in-patient treatment, but had always objected to his new placement, wishing to return home.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Read All
Conveyancers celebrate U-turn over mortgage handbook fee
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
Are you suited to a career in prosecution?
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
LSB marks Mazur homework
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
NLJ this week: Stuck in the past?
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
NLJ this week: No automatic bar on ‘user damages’
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll