Inherent jurisdiction and vulnerable adults: Redcar and Cleveland BC v PR  EWHC 2305 (Fam) and Wakefield MDC v DN  EWHC 2306 (Fam)
Publication Date: 13 September 2019
Photo: Chris Titze/AdobeStock
By Tim Spencer-Lane Introduction The inherent jurisdiction of the High Court, sometimes referred to as the “great safety net”, exists to fill gaps left by the law. Historically, in relation to adults, the courts had developed this jurisdiction primarily to protect those lacking decision-making capacity. As a result of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), […]
You need to log in to Community Care Inform to view this content. If you have a subscription, please log in here.
Please contact the Community Care Inform helpdesk or phone 020 3915 9444 if you require support or assistance or are unsure if you have a subscription.
If you are directly quoting the author's own words from this document you must acknowledge that they are not your own words by putting them within quotes marks, reference the source in the text and then provide the full reference at the end of the document. For example:
In the text:
Baim argues that "understanding adult attachment patterns can also help practitioners to more readily identify the behaviour patterns that the client uses to maintain safety and comfort and which also, in some cases, serve to keep the client stuck in behaviour that no longer serves them as adults". (Baim, 2015)
Full reference to insert at the bottom of the document:
Baim, C. (2015) Using attachment theory to work with adults, Guide.
Community Care Inform Adults [online].
Available at: https://adults.ccinform.co.uk/guides/guide-using-attachment-theory-work-adults/ [accessed: INSERT DATE HERE (eg 9 October 2015)]