The “highly likely” test under s.31(2A) of the Senior Courts Act
Public law case update Q3 2025
Kinship care – latest developments
Roll up, roll up
Proposed changes to the consumer standards
The Employment Rights Act 2025 – Breakdown of Key Dates
Renters’ Rights Act 2025: What’s new for private sector housing enforcement?
HMOs and “self-contained flats”
What impact will the Renters’ Rights Act have on homelessness?
Only or Principal Home…again
Defending Age Assessment Challenges: A Guide for Local Authorities
Top-up fees: a growing risk for councils
Prohibitions orders, assessments and the HSSRS
Highways, kerbs and intervention levels
Providence Building Services Limited v Hexagon Housing Association Limited – The case for a stay
Local government reorganisation and historic liabilities
The status of co-opted members
Open Justice Principle – Where are the lines drawn in care proceedings?
What's the best way to manage conflict between colleagues in schools and colleges?
Scrutiny of professionals working in Children Act litigation
Teacher dismissed after joking about 'whacking' a pupil: was the decision fair?
Fear of harm and plans for adoption
Electronic and workplace balloting for statutory union ballots
Issues Resolution Hearings, threshold criteria and adequacy of reasons
Foster carers and manifestation of religious belief
Contempt, disclosure failures, and information governance
The ‘Hillsborough Law’, senior leaders and prevention of critical harm
Hoarding and learning from inquests – safeguarding to prevent tragic outcomes
Judging the use of AI
The Hammad appeal – Housing authority responses to homelessness in England and Wales
Natural justice and costs in the Court of Protection
The Procurement Act 2023: 10 months on, how is it going?
Costs, detailed assessment and misconduct
Airport expansion, EIAs and emissions
Boosting localised procurement - Reform to Section 17 LGA 1988
The Autumn Budget and Public-Private Partnerships
Calculation of Biodiversity Net Gain
The new National Licensing Policy Framework
The Social and Affordable Homes Programme: key points
Caravan site licensing and planning control
From 1925 to 2025
Licence revocation appeals and a change in circumstances
Self-neglect and capacity
Renewal of telecoms leases and building safety regulation
Procurement Act 2023: Anticipating and avoiding procurement disputes
Access injunctions: legal pathways to forced access and decants
Preparing for heat network regulation: timelines, obligations, and next steps
The lost enforcement of section 21
Housing case alert - November 2025
Section 21 - It’s not over yet
Expert evidence in housing conditions claims
Inquests and Housing
Wolverhampton Traveller injunctions – where are we now?
Is there a discretion to extinguish CIL?
Balancing public interest and planning control – accommodation of asylum seekers
Meaning of father in s2 Children Act 1989
A “43 moment” for the local government workforce
Section 193 LPA 1925: public access to commons and waste land
Growing apart?
Political and mayoral assistants
PFI expiry and employees
Welsh-medium inquests and the death register
The future of housing: What procurement and contracts teams need to know
No liability for sap falling on the public highway
Weapons in Cardiff educational settings: new guidance for schools
Public Sector High Court Litigation in 2025: Key trends so far
Enjoying the challenge
Abandoning procurements: risky business
The surge in Subsidy Control litigation
Dispersal of asylum seekers
Causation and being “homeless intentionally”
Strengthening the standards and conduct framework for local authorities in England
Facts still very much matter
Court of Appeal rules on exclusions once again
Faith-based oversubscription criteria
How to place children abroad after Re M
Fact finding in the Court of Protection
Discrimination arising from disability: did a school discriminate against a pupil when it excluded her?
Care cases involving multiple allegations
SEND and pupils absent due to health needs
Granting of parental responsibility
Confidentiality clauses and severance payments in FE colleges and Academy Trusts
The importance of an adequate mortgagee exclusion clause
Managing AI Risks in Local Government
Reconciling Conflicting Private and Public Interests on Large-Scale Infrastructure Projects
Subsidy Control – top tips for public authorities referring measures to the CMA's Subsidy Advice Unit
Vice-President of Court of Protection issues further guidance for judges and practitioners on hearings
- Details
No hearings in the Court of Protection which require people to attend are to take place unless there is a genuine urgency and it is not possible to conduct a remote hearing, the Court’s Vice-President has said.
In Further Guidance for Judges and Practitioners in the Court of Protection arising from Covid-19 (external link to Alex Ruck-Keene’s Mental Capacity Law and Policy blog) Mr Justice Hayden said the Lord Chief Justice’s directions for hearings in County and Family Courts did not address the Court of Protection but it seemed to him that exactly the same measures should be extended to it.
The LCJ had said: “No hearings which require people to attend are to take place in any County or Family Court until further notice, unless there is a genuine urgency and no remote hearing is possible. All cases currently being heard should be adjourned part heard so that arrangements can be made, where possible, to conduct the hearings remotely”.
Mr Justice Hayden highlighted how Mostyn J had recently conducted an extremely complex and urgent hearing entirely by Skype conference, saying this illustrated the fact that even cases of “genuine urgency” may be heard remotely.
The Vice-President said: “Perhaps more than any other court, the Court of Protection is required to hear cases which can properly be described as ‘genuinely urgent’ and sometimes involve decisions concerning life and death.
“Some judges have expressed concern as to how these very serious cases will be identified and afforded priority in our present challenging circumstances. The short answer is that for now the existing procedures will continue to apply.
“Thus, the application will be issued at First Avenue House and then transferred to Tier 3 (the Royal Courts of Justice) via the generic email. A judge will then be allocated to hear the case. Though most of the staff are presently working remotely the system is continuing to work effectively.”
Mr Justice Hayden added that he did understand the judicial anxiety about this particular category of case.
“Accordingly, if there is any difficulty in issuing or processing these applications, my clerk may be emailed directly and I will ensure that a judge is identified (details via the link above). I would however wish to emphasise that this is a backup arrangement to be followed only if there are difficulties in processing the case through the usual channels.”
Mr Justice Hayden ended the guidance by saying: “As we all appreciate the landscape has changed on a fairly regular basis over the course of the last ten days. It is equally obvious that the challenges are not going to be resolved quickly. May I, once again, thank all of you for your continuing hard work and professionalism.”
The Vice-President's earlier guidance can be accessed here.







