What happened
HHJ Burrows has handed down one of the first Court of Protection judgments applying the Supreme Court's June 2026 ruling that replaced the Cheshire West "acid test" with a multifactorial, case-specific approach to deprivation of liberty. Re BM concerned a 16-year-old with autism and severe learning disability living in a solo residential placement under 3:1 staffing, continuous supervision, locked doors and authorised restraint. Despite the intensity of the restrictions — which the judge accepted would previously have meant a finding of deprivation of liberty — the court held BM is not deprived of his liberty, weighing the protective and enabling purpose of the arrangements, the relative normality of the placement for someone with his needs, and his own contentment and attachment to his home. The judge added that, had deprivation been established, he would not have found valid consent: contentment and compliance are not the same as consent. The decision signals a material shift in how DoLS cases involving people with learning disabilities and autism will be assessed, with direct implications for providers, commissioners and local authorities.
Why it matters
Developments like this shape commissioning, regulation and provider strategy across learning disability services. Members can follow the providers named here, plus the leadership moves and pay benchmarks that follow.