header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 November 2013
Issue: 7583 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Mental health—Persons who lack capacity—Withholding of treatment

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James [2013] UKSC 67

Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger P, Lady Hale DP, Lord Clarke, Lord Carnwath and Lord Hughes SCJJ, 30 October 2013

The Supreme Court has reviewed the principles under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for determining whether a patient lacks capacity to consent to or refuse treatment of any kind and whether it would be in his best interests for specified treatments to be withheld in the event of a clinical deterioration. 

Ian Wise QC, Stephen Broach and Sam Jacobs (instructed by Jackson and Canter) for DJ. Lord Pannick QC and Vikram Sachdeva (instructed by Hill Dickinson LLP) for the Trust. Alex Ruck Keene and Victoria Butler-Cole (instructed by Bevan Brittan LLP) for the interveners.

The proceedings concerned a patient, DJ. He was admitted to hospital in May 2012, aged around 68. He suffered very severe conditions including a stroke, with severe neurological damage, and he was completely dependent on artificial ventilation and required regular tube suction. 

The official

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS
Read All
Legal notice: Notice under the Trustee Act 1925

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Emergency lawyers on call as international regulatory actions soar
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll