This is a sad case seeking to raise the alarm about the drastic shortage of regulated placements capable of meeting the welfare needs of children with complex emotional and behavioural needs.
The Supreme Court’s ruling has huge implications for anyone working in the gig economy as it has clarified the approach to be taken by the courts when deciding whether someone is a worker. All the circumstances will be taken into account including the conduct of the parties (not just the written terms), and what matters is whether the individual is in a position of dependency and subordination.
This judgment discusses anticipatory deprivation of liberty orders in the context of prospective loss of capacity and the tension between respecting a young person’s autonomy and protecting them from harm when making best interest decisions.
What is best practice for local authorities delivering Care Act 2014 services during the COVID-19 pandemic?The Coronavirus Act (“CVA 2020”) has fundamentally altered local authorities’ duties under the Care Act 2014 (“CA 2014”). However, a day after the changes came into effect the government released statutory guidance, which has significantly tempered the changes imposed by the CVA 2020.
Unlike the Care Act 2014, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (“MCA 2005”) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (“DoLS”) have not been altered by the Coronavirus Act 2020 (“CVA 2020”). Therefore the challenges for practitioners concern the practicalities of how the existing regime applies during the COVID-19 crisis, rather than new legislative changes.
While it may be a daunting prospect to ensure family justice in the time of a global pandemic, directions hearings in private children and domestic abuse cases seem well-suited to remote hearings.
Two recent cases, Re A (Children) (Parental Alienation) and In Re H (A Child) (Parental Alienation), have once again highlighted the need for lawyers, parents and courts to be live to the possibility of parental alienation.