Munby J discussed the court’s inherent powers to make orders to protect the welfare of a vulnerable adult: ‘It is elementary that the court exercises its powers by reference to the incompetent adult’s best interests . . The particular form of order will, naturally, depend upon the particular circumstances of the case.’ As to the development of the power: ‘New problems will generate new demands and produce new remedies’ and ‘Just as there are, in theory, no limits to the court’s powers when exercising the wardship jurisdiction I suspect that there are, in theory, few if any limits to the court’s powers when exercising the inherent jurisdiction in relation to adults.’
The jurisdiction ‘is, in substance and reality . . [and] for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its well-established parens patriae or wardship jurisdictions in relation to children’.
 EWHC 2942 (Fam),  1 FLR 867,  2 FCR 563,  Fam Law 268, (2007) 10 CCL Rep 193
England and Wales
Cited – In re PS (an Adult), Re; City of Sunderland v PS by her litigation friend the Offcial Solcicitor and CA; Re PS (Incapacitated or Vulnerable Adult) FD 9-Mar-2007
The patient an elderly lady with limited mental capacity was to be returned from hospital, but her daughter said she was to come home. The local authority sought to prevent this, wanting to return her to a residential unit where she had lived for . .
Cited – G v E and Others CoP 26-Mar-2010
E Was born with and still suffered severe learning difficulties. The court was asked as to the extent of his capacity to make decisions, and as to where he should live, with a family member, the carer or with the local authority, which had removed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Health, Children, Litigation Practice
Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.239293