Jurisdiction and Sequestered Medical Records

Discussion in 'Legal and financial issues' started by goffredo, Oct 29, 2015.

  1. goffredo

    goffredo Registered User

    Apr 27, 2014
    6
    Hello,

    I'm looking for a definitive answer if there is one.
    P is habitually resident in France.
    P's English NHS Medical Records cannot be converted into cash, so strictly speaking they are not assets.
    Does the E&W Court of Protection have the jurisdiction to access/sequester them for an expert-witness report?
    Thanks
    G
     
  2. jenniferpa

    jenniferpa Volunteer Moderator

    Jun 27, 2006
    39,418
    I'm finding your post somewhat confusing

    E & W ? Are you just using a short form to refer to the England and Wales Court of protection? And if so, you're asking if the court can examine medical records? In which case they do that all the time when there are issues regarding a person's welfare. I'm not sure where sequestering them would come in though.

    Mind you, if the person lives in France, why would it be the UK COP doing this?
     
  3. jugglingmum

    jugglingmum Registered User

    Jan 5, 2014
    4,911
    Female
    Chester
    This statement seems very odd phraseology. Why because something cannot be converted into cash is it not an asset?

    You will find most commercial contracts on the sale of a business will list the company's records and allocate a value of £1 - in multi million pound deals, so considered assets. Anything with value as a document is an asset.

    And why do medical records need to be cash to be sequestered - using your terminology.

    There are many instances in law where financial books and records can be seized by HM Revenue & Customs, with a search warrant or court order so parallel to your description of the medical records.

    I don't really understand your reference to CoP to be honest. If you provide more details then someone maybe able to help you.
     
  4. goffredo

    goffredo Registered User

    Apr 27, 2014
    6
    P is resident in France with UK assets. CoP has jurisdiction over P's assets but not over P's person, hence cannot force P to attend a capacity assessment. Former English solicitor asked CoP to appoint panel deputies. P objected that CoP cannot prove lack of capacity so ex-solicitor applied to the court to sequester P's medical records from her Uk GP for an expert-witness report. Medical records showed Alzheimer's so expert witness response was ' unable to conduct litigation' from which CoP claimed on balance of probabilities that P lacks capacity, thereby claiming jurisdiction over P herself 'in her best interest' as well as her assets. All income derives from England so Deputies can sell her assets, dump several million into the infamous fund and haul her back from the freedom of the sunny south of France for a life sentence of grey days in an English care home.
    This is the monster known as the Court of Protection.
     
  5. jenniferpa

    jenniferpa Volunteer Moderator

    Jun 27, 2006
    39,418
    I understand that you are stressed and feel you are fighting the system but I don't think you're going to get very far by slagging off the COP who, frankly, do a difficult job under difficult circumstances.

    I have reread your previous posts: are you saying that the COP did appoint someone as a deputy for your friend? And if so, was that deputy given authorization for health and welfare decision (unusual). If not, they cannot force her into a care home.
     
  6. goffredo

    goffredo Registered User

    Apr 27, 2014
    6
    Thanks for your kind reply. The CoP do a difficult job but have been given too much power to ignore basic human rights, particularly the fifth, so that if P's funds are taken over and she cannot pay the rent in France where will she go, French care home?? English care home?? must ask deputies everytime she fancies taking a trip to visit her many friends in Australia or China or USA? Well, obviously I'll continue to look after her but my days are numbered and my memory is going and she is a highly intelligent and very determined and scared 90 year old WWII veteran with a worsening memory and has the strength of character to a jump out of a high window if she feels imprisoned, of course I'm just a little stressed out.
    Anyway.
    Deputies not yet appointed. Original surreptitious deputy application made January 2014 rejected by court after we proved that P is resident in France. In 2014 attorneys tried twice to register Certified Copy of EPA that P had instructed her ex solicitor to replace in 2006 but who did not get P to formally revoke old EPA, intentionly laying a trap. Not sure why but second registration attempt was not completed, probably because ex-solicitor would have had to commit perjury to explain what happened to the original EPA document. In July 2014 in an attempt to get proof that P lacks capacity ex solicitor got court to order a expert-witness examination of P's English medical record with Alzheimers diagnosis. It appears that the court then accepted that this was not conclusive proof of lack of capacity. (No certificate). We applied to close case suggesting forum non conveniens. Heard nothing for a whole year until just received communication that the judge had accepted application from ex-solicitor to appoint Official Solicitor to represent P at an attended hearing for deputy appointment. The judge claimed CoP jurisdiction over P on the evidence of the expert-witness report that P lacks capacity to litigate. In effect judge forgoes the requirement of proof of lack of capacity required to appoint official solicitor, in an attempt to grab P's assets. I'm sure he will claim he is acting in P's best interests.
    Hence the question, does the court really have legitimate jurisdiction over P's medical records, that evidently relate to her person, over whom they do not have jurisdiction, or are the records part of her property and affairs and the report thereon admissible in court?
    Thanks for help
     
  7. Pickles53

    Pickles53 Registered User

    Feb 25, 2014
    2,482
    Radcliffe on Trent
    I feel for you in what are clearly very difficult circumstances, but I'm not sure that any if us can really help here. These are very complex legal arguments you are putting forward. We can share our own experiences but even with apparently similar facts courts don't always reach the same decision. Everything comes down to how a court or judge interprets terms like 'reasonable' or 'capacity' based on the specific individual facts of a case and that's what keeps lawyers in business.
     
  8. goffredo

    goffredo Registered User

    Apr 27, 2014
    6
    Thank you for this wise comment.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.