A deputy district judge has set directions to enable the court to consider whether a man’s bedroom should receive a bedbug fumigation.
What was initially described as a “very complex and unusual matter” which would result in a “very serious infringement of P’s rights” proved to be shrouded in mystery as contrary to guidance that opening summaries should become “routine normal practice” none was given in this case.
The comments were made by Ms Jones, counsel representing the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust, who were making the application at this in-person hearing at First Avenue House in Holborn.
Daniel Clark, a member of the core team of the Open Justice Court of Protection Project, wrote about a similar experience of a lack of an opening introduction in a hearing before the same judge in 2023 describing it as “closed and opaque justice“.
Also present at this hearing was Ms Ahmed, representing the official solicitor, who we were told hadn’t filled a position statement due to “funding issues“.
The court was told the bedbug issue had been going on for a “very long time” at the eight-bedroom placement where P, the man at the centre of proceedings, is resident.
Both P’s identity and the location of the placement are covered by reporting restrictions.
Pertinent details, such as in what respects P was said to lack capacity, his reasons for resisting the bed bug treatment, how the bed bugs were effecting him, exactly how long the infestation had been there, and his age, were not revealed in this 34-minute-hearing.
Ms Jones submitted that efforts were underway to obtain the tenancy agreement signed in 2015 as “if P is taken to provisions of the tenancy agreement to show the landlord has rights” to treat pests this may “assist with the discussion“.
We were told that P had previously co-operated with a pest treatment plan in 2021, and efforts were underway to get details of this.
Pest control firm Rentokil were also going to be contacted to obtain an up-to-date treatment plan. A previous report dated October 2023 was said to now be out of date.
Ms Ahmed confirmed that “the way forward is agreed” and “no additional matters, in terms of directions, are sought“.
Responding to a question by Deputy District Judge Saimo Chahal, as to whether the other residents were at risk from the bedbugs, Ms Ahmed said she had “read far too much about bedbugs in advance of the hearing” but she understood that they mainly travel by luggage.
Ms Ahmed said the treatment plan could be given to P by way of a letter. She explained that the “gentleman had worked in retail management,” and there was “no reason to assume why he wouldn’t understand plain English although perhaps not legal terms“.
DDJ Chahal said there would be a need to consider alternative accommodation while the treatment was being given. “It may make sense for him to be out of the property for 3 weeks” while this was done.
A roundtable meeting was expected to be held at the end of June, with the matter returning to court at a later point.
In The Court of Protection 5th Floor First Avenue House 42-49 High Holborn London WC1V 6NP
Monday 3 June 2024
Before Deputy District Judge Chahal
Court 24 11:00 AM
COP14249514
IJB-v-SLaM NHS Trust
Directions:
(a) Capacity to make decisions about a bed bug infestation
(b) Where IJB should reside
(c) Authorisation of Deprivation of Liberty
(d) Authorisation of interference with IJB’s property
Mouse in the Court 