protecting those who do not want to be protected
On 28 March 2012, in the case of DL v A local
authority & Ors, the Court of Appeal was faced with
the question of whether the courts can intervene to protect
vulnerable adults from psychological abuse even though they don’t
lack mental capacity for the purpose of the Mental Capacity Act
2005 (MCA).
H and W were aged 85 and 90 respectively and lived with DL, who
was in his fifties. The local authority was concerned about DL's
alleged conduct towards his parents; it was alleged that he
physically assaulted them, threatened them, prevented them from
leaving the house, and controlled who could visit them including
health and social care professionals. It was also alleged that he
was attempting to coerce H into transferring the house into his
name, and sought to have W moved into a care home against her
wishes. The local authority wanted to protect DL's parents, even
though they had sufficient mental capacity to make their own
decisions (and therefore did not fall under the MCA).
The Court of Appeal decided that the MCA was limited to people
who lacked mental capacity, but there was a sound and strong public
policy justification for the will of a vulnerable adult to be
overborne, and where the facts justified it. Such individuals
required and deserved the protection of the authorities and the law
so that they could regain their autonomy.
what this means for social landlords
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 has not ousted the High Court's
ability to protect vulnerable adults who are under constraint,
subject to coercion or undue influence.
