Private Hearings In The Court Of Protection

When it comes to Court of Protection hearings, the general rule is that they are held in private. The judgments are normally redacted and parties’ names removed and replaced with letters or another name. When it comes to attending a hearing, the parties invited normally include the Protected Party, their legal representatives, litigation friends, and Court officers.

If a party other than those invited wishes to attend a Court of Protection hearing in private, then they can make an application to the judge hearing the matter. The application form for this is form COP9, accompanied by a COP24 giving your reasons for attending.

The Court is able to make an order departing from the general rule. If the Court departs from the general rule, it will order that a hearing be held in public and restrict the publication of information as they see fit.

Background

In this case, the issue of whether it would be in the public interest to publish an order relating to a public figure has recently been considered. The Court found itself considering the Protected Party, public curiosity, and public interest.

In considering whether information should be published and shared with the public, the Court highlighted that there is a clear difference between public interest and public curiosity. It was stated that public interest lies in knowing what goes on in the Court. The Court also considered the decision made in respect of the Duke of Edinburgh’s estate, in that it was deemed there was no public interest in knowing private information concerning the disposition of his estate. In another similar case, it was considered that being in the public eye did not mean that the right to respect private and family life, which are not in the public eye, did not deserve any less respect than anyone else’s.

It was decided that a judgment would not be published on the application that had been made. The Court stated that any order would have been heavily redacted and would therefore have made little to no sense.

The judgment was delivered in private in accordance with the Practice Guidance of 16 January 2014: Transparency in the Court of Protection – Publication of Judgments.

When deciding what should and shouldn’t be published or shared with the public in Court of Protection proceedings, the Court will need to continue to carefully consider each case and its facts and its relationship with public interest.