Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #NotSecretCourt
Most recents (16)
š§µTransparency
1/
Once a month or so, we look systematically at COP listings in Courtel/CourtServe (the publicly available listing service for the courts) to check how well they support transparency + open justice.
Here's September's analysis
Some good news
Some bad.
1/
Once a month or so, we look systematically at COP listings in Courtel/CourtServe (the publicly available listing service for the courts) to check how well they support transparency + open justice.
Here's September's analysis
Some good news
Some bad.
2/
We've kept our ambitions for the listings realistically modest.
We're only asking that COP hearings are in the COP list, make clear the public can observe, tell us whether a hearing is remote/hybrid/in-person, supply contact details + some info on what the hearing is about.
We've kept our ambitions for the listings realistically modest.
We're only asking that COP hearings are in the COP list, make clear the public can observe, tell us whether a hearing is remote/hybrid/in-person, supply contact details + some info on what the hearing is about.
3/
So here's what the COP list in Courtserve looks like (the pic on the left)
CourtServe is free to access (you just have to register ) + it's the main way we find out about hearings, across all the courts (not just COP).
You can access it here: courtserve.net
So here's what the COP list in Courtserve looks like (the pic on the left)
CourtServe is free to access (you just have to register ) + it's the main way we find out about hearings, across all the courts (not just COP).
You can access it here: courtserve.net
š§µ
Another thread about hidden hearings.
Because there are still so many.
Court of Protection listings are still a long way from supporting the judiciary's aspirations for transparency in the #NotSecretCourt
Another thread about hidden hearings.
Because there are still so many.
Court of Protection listings are still a long way from supporting the judiciary's aspirations for transparency in the #NotSecretCourt
2. I don't doubt the judiciary's commitment to open justice and transparency - and I believe it is shared by most Court of Protection judges and lawyers, and understood by most court staff.
And yet....
And yet....
3. There should be a single list of all county court Court of Protection hearings in one place - under the "Court of Protection" heading in CourtServe.
A thread
1. Almost all Court of Protection hearings are open for public to observe: they aren't "private".
The COP is committed to open justice + transparency.
But about half the COP hearings every day are branded "PRIVATE".
This sends the wrong message from #notsecretcourt
1. Almost all Court of Protection hearings are open for public to observe: they aren't "private".
The COP is committed to open justice + transparency.
But about half the COP hearings every day are branded "PRIVATE".
This sends the wrong message from #notsecretcourt
@HMCTSgovuk 2. It's bizarre and counter-productive for a court that is very committed to open justice (and - whatever its failings - delivers on it better than most other parts of the justice system) to put out the message that half of its hearings are "PRIVATE".
3. More than half of the hearings in the COP listing on CourtServe today say hearings are "PRIVATE".
Only one (as far as I can tell) would actually exclude observers - because it's a Dispute Resolution Hearing.
Observers are not being deliberately excluded from the others.
Only one (as far as I can tell) would actually exclude observers - because it's a Dispute Resolution Hearing.
Observers are not being deliberately excluded from the others.
A thread about listings in the "private" Court of Protection
This week some would-be observers contacted me to say the COP hearings in their regional court were all being held "in private" so they couldn't observe them.
How could they find some "public" ones?
This week some would-be observers contacted me to say the COP hearings in their regional court were all being held "in private" so they couldn't observe them.
How could they find some "public" ones?
Many COP hearings (sometimes *most* of them) are listed as "in private" and "not open to public".
I know the court doesn't mean to say we can't observe them, but most people don't know that. Why should they?
It's a huge obstacle to open justice to list hearings as "private".
I know the court doesn't mean to say we can't observe them, but most people don't know that. Why should they?
It's a huge obstacle to open justice to list hearings as "private".
Listing COP hearings as "private" is very common.
Do you want to guess how many of the 23 hearings listed in CourtServe for tomorrow (16th May 2022) are listed as "private".
Remember this is the #NotSecretCourt!
Do you want to guess how many of the 23 hearings listed in CourtServe for tomorrow (16th May 2022) are listed as "private".
Remember this is the #NotSecretCourt!
Why does the Open Justice Court of Protection Project make its own lists of hearings?
Can't members of the public rely on the lists the Court publishes: lists from the Royal Courts of Justice, First Avenue House and CourtServe?
It's a lot of work - here's why we do it.
Can't members of the public rely on the lists the Court publishes: lists from the Royal Courts of Justice, First Avenue House and CourtServe?
It's a lot of work - here's why we do it.
One very important reason is that the published lists 'hide' some hearings by listing them in the wrong place.
Other hearings never appear on the court-published lists: they're effectively 'secret'.
'Hidden' and 'secret' hearings are a massive problem for open justice.
Other hearings never appear on the court-published lists: they're effectively 'secret'.
'Hidden' and 'secret' hearings are a massive problem for open justice.
This thread focuses CourtServe, which was clearly never developed with the idea that members of the public would use it to identify hearings to observe.
It's supposed to list ALL the Court of Protection hearings in the county courts every day, under
"Court of Protection" tab.
It's supposed to list ALL the Court of Protection hearings in the county courts every day, under
"Court of Protection" tab.
Hayden J is proposing hearing the case now - both counsel want to adjourn. "For a multitude of reasons" says Debra Powell QC (for the OS). She'll present reasons why capacity decision shouldn't be made now after lunch break. Restarting 1.40pm.
Referring to 1(3) MCA 2005, Hayden comments "it's possible to overcook- Is all this NECESSARY to decide capacity?"
Counsel responds sharply "In my respectful submission My Lord, oral evidence from a consultant psychiatrist who has recently assessed her capacity is NECESSARY"
Counsel responds sharply "In my respectful submission My Lord, oral evidence from a consultant psychiatrist who has recently assessed her capacity is NECESSARY"
P was quoted by P as saying that she wants a vaginal delivery - and if she has to have a caesarean she wants it with a epidural and her partner present. Her least favoured birth option is a caesarean under general anaesthetic (which is what I think the Trust has applied for)
Hearing before Hayden J just starting. As public observers we have to be flexible - judges are hearing multiple cases and timing is a challenge. #NotSecretCourt
Another challenging case of a pregnant woman with schizophrenia and doctors requesting c-section, although she said some weeks ago, when she had capacity, that she'd prefer a vaginal delivery. #NotSecretCourt
We've published several blogs about similar cases. In this case the pregnant woman was found to have capacity to make her own decisions: openjusticecourtofprotection.org/2021/09/21/refā¦
A thread about today's hearing on life-sustaining treatment before Mr. Justice Cobb in the Court of Protection. #NotSecretCourt
A man in his 50s, NK, is in the Intensive Care Unit. He went into hospital on 29th June 2021 with pneumonia.
A man in his 50s, NK, is in the Intensive Care Unit. He went into hospital on 29th June 2021 with pneumonia.
He got worse and on 5th July had a cardiac arrest.
He received cardio-pulmonary resuscitation for at least 12 mins.
Brain injury after CPR is very common. thelancet.com/journals/lanceā¦
He received cardio-pulmonary resuscitation for at least 12 mins.
Brain injury after CPR is very common. thelancet.com/journals/lanceā¦
After CPR, he was sedated, intubated, ventilated + moved to ICU.
Scans show a very significant hypoxic ischaemic brain injury.
The unanimous view of the treating team is that he's now in a Permanent Vegetative State.
Scans show a very significant hypoxic ischaemic brain injury.
The unanimous view of the treating team is that he's now in a Permanent Vegetative State.
A thread about the trouble with transparency orders in the #NotSecretCourt.
I've observed 223 remote hearings in the Court of Protection.
I've just looked through my files.
I have had 98 transparency orders (TOs) served on me.
So for most hearings, I never get a TO.
I've observed 223 remote hearings in the Court of Protection.
I've just looked through my files.
I have had 98 transparency orders (TOs) served on me.
So for most hearings, I never get a TO.
I think this is mostly because it's nobody's job to send me a TO.
The "Video Hearings Administrator" never sends them. When I've asked, the answer is "ask the court".
I've rarely been sent a TO by the judge's clerk.
When they come, it tends to be barristers who send them.
The "Video Hearings Administrator" never sends them. When I've asked, the answer is "ask the court".
I've rarely been sent a TO by the judge's clerk.
When they come, it tends to be barristers who send them.
These are barristers in court, in a hearing, trying to represent their client.
Knowing that I need a TO, I email them + ask. Sometimes they send them. Often they don't.
I would ask instructing solicitors, but usually can't tell who they are from the list of names on MS Teams.
Knowing that I need a TO, I email them + ask. Sometimes they send them. Often they don't.
I would ask instructing solicitors, but usually can't tell who they are from the list of names on MS Teams.
At a Court of Protection hearing today, before Mr Justice Keehan, I listened to doctors report on how theyād given āfutileā & āāburdensomeā treatment to a dying man over many weeks. It was like listening to a story of medical torture. #EOLC #NotSecretCourt
The patient, āKMā, in his 50s, was admitted to hospital on 19 Jan with breathlessness & chest pain after long haul flight. It was a pulmonary embolism. Clots reached his heart. He then had a cardiac arrest. Then tested positive for Covid. He has severe & irreversible lung damage.
He's been kept alive for the last 15 weeks with ExtraCorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO). A machine transports blood from the body to an artificial lung (oxygenator) that, like the human lungs, adds oxygen and removes carbon dioxide.
This morning I observed this hearing before Judge Rebecca Brown in the Court of Protection concerning whether it was in the best interests of a man in his 30s ("AD") to be vaccinated against Covid-19. #NotSecretCourt
The case was brought by CCG who believe C-19 vaccination to be in AD's best interests.
AD was represented by OS who was of the same view.
His mother opposes vaccination.
AD has Down's syndrome, learning disability + autism. He's "resistant to all healthcare interventions".
AD was represented by OS who was of the same view.
His mother opposes vaccination.
AD has Down's syndrome, learning disability + autism. He's "resistant to all healthcare interventions".
Multi-disciplinary team of professionals has drawn up a plan. He'll be vaccinated at home.Encouraged to wear short sleeved top that morning + covertly sedated via his morning drink. While "distracted by his favourite activities", nurse will enter + jab him without any engagement.
This afternoon I attended an "urgent" Court of Protection hearing via video-link.
Another amputation case.
A 43 year old man, FA, gangrene in both feet, at risk of fatal septicaemia.
He's consistently stated he doesn't want double amputation, as surgically recommended.
Another amputation case.
A 43 year old man, FA, gangrene in both feet, at risk of fatal septicaemia.
He's consistently stated he doesn't want double amputation, as surgically recommended.
This is so similar to another case (ZA) I blogged about today
Both have paranoid schizophrenia, diabetes + severe infections
Both are refusing amputation.
ZA was heard by Cohen J (judgment tomorrow)
FA was heard by Hayden J + he gave oral judgment
openjusticecourtofprotection.org/2021/04/29/couā¦
Both have paranoid schizophrenia, diabetes + severe infections
Both are refusing amputation.
ZA was heard by Cohen J (judgment tomorrow)
FA was heard by Hayden J + he gave oral judgment
openjusticecourtofprotection.org/2021/04/29/couā¦
FA was in court throughout the hearing, propped up on pillows in bed on a hospital ward, with his solicitor by his side.
He was represented in court by Katie Gollop (via the Official Solicitor). @katiegollop
The Trust was represented by Rhys Hadden.
He was represented in court by Katie Gollop (via the Official Solicitor). @katiegollop
The Trust was represented by Rhys Hadden.
A fractious hearing today!
Counsel accused of "a charade, a game"; counter-claims "a tactical move".
We've had "my learned friend is simply wrong..." and "my learned friend has misrepresented my position".
Judge says "I can't give this case very much more of my time".
Counsel accused of "a charade, a game"; counter-claims "a tactical move".
We've had "my learned friend is simply wrong..." and "my learned friend has misrepresented my position".
Judge says "I can't give this case very much more of my time".
Judical eyebrows were raised: "this debate is becoming increasingly unedifying" he says, as parties "have locked horns".
Judge limits witness statements to 15 pages. They are now talking about fonts: "you can get about 30% more on the page with Aerial narrow".
Judge says 12 point Times Roman. And double spaced.
Judge says 12 point Times Roman. And double spaced.
Today I cried in court. I was watching 3 lovely, articulate, passionate young women (the older 2 just out of their teens) come to terms with the fact that their Dad was going to die. Doctors believed that continuing life-sustaining treatment was not in his best interests.
The family hoped+believed he would recover. There was a WhatsApp video his wife + brother believed showed P responding to them. Doctors (incl. independent expert) said no - it was involuntary movement. P is in a coma with catastrophic brain (stem) injury following stroke.
The applicant Trust was represented by Nageena Khalique QC @serjeantsinn seeking withdrawal of ventilation (+ provision of palliative care). P's brother (rep by @CounselTweets) argued for continuation of life-sustaining treatment. Official Solicitor (for P) was @DrBridgetDolan
Today's hearing concerned a Trust's application for approval of an order for a 63 year old man with learning disabilities to be given a trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) - using chemical or physical restraint if necessary.
nhs.uk/conditions/traā¦
#NotSecretCourt
nhs.uk/conditions/traā¦
#NotSecretCourt
He's terrified of hospitals because "that's where my Dad died". He currently has a catheter in place but that needs changing every 3 months with all the difficulties occasioned by a hospital visit. A TURP would fix the urinary problems once and for all.
Mr Justice Hayden is superb today. A clear + unwavering focus on P. "I'm eager to ensure the TERP is undertaken on the basis of clinical need, rather than due to the challenges of getting P to hospital. How do I satisfy myself of that?"
It's impossible not to feel both humbled + impressed by the (so far) 3 day court hearing I've been watching before Mr Justice Hayden in the Court of Protection. At the centre of the case is a young man whose dignity, integrity + kindness shine through. #NotSecretCourt
The overriding priority in court is not to violate his autonomy - coupled with a concern from everyone to enable + support him to make a choice to stay alive. He has a past full of suffering and a future full of promise.
His parents are extraordinary people who provide love, kindness, safety. They also respect his values and his autonomy. They describe him as thoughtful + considerate; he puts others before himself; he is honest and very clear on what's right + wrong.
