25.70Re Z (An Adult: Capacity) [2004] EWHC 2817 Fam, (2005) 8 CCLR 146
Local authorities were required to investigate, where it appeared that a vulnerable adult intended to undertake an assisted suicide, to ensure that the adult was competent properly, informed and not improperly influenced; but it had no power to stop an adult with capacity taking that course
Facts: Mrs Z suffered from an incurable condition and was deteriorating; she had eventually persuaded her family to accede to her wish to undertake an assisted suicide in Switzerland. The local authority sought an injunction to prevent Mr Z taking her there, under the Family Division’s inherent jurisdiction.
Judgment: Hedley J refused the application, holding that it was not unlawful for a person with the mental capacity to make the choice to take their own life, and that although a family member who assisted them would probably incur criminal liability, it was pre-eminently a matter for the police and the DPP to decide whether to enforce that. However, where a local authority learnt that a vulnerable person in their area intended to undertake assisted suicide, it had a duty to take some action:
19. In my judgment in a case such as this the local authority incurred the following duties: (i) to investigate the position of a vulnerable adult to consider what was her true position and intention; (ii) to consider whether she was legally competent to make and carry out her decision and intention; (iii) to consider whether any other (and if so, what) influence may be operating on her position and intention and to ensure that she has all relevant information and knows all available options; (iv) to consider whether to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court so that the question of competence could be judicially investigated and determined; (v) in the event of the adult not being competent, to provide all such assistance as may be reasonably required both to determine and give effect to her best interests; (vi) in the event of the adult being competent to allow her in any lawful way to give effect to her decision although that should not preclude the giving of advice or assistance in accordance with what are perceived to be her best interests; (vii) where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the commission of a criminal offence may be involved, to draw that to the attention of the police; (viii) in very exceptional circumstances, to invoke the jurisdiction of the court under section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972. My view is that their duties do not extend beyond that. In this case, although they have the power to do so under section 222 of the 1972 Act, in my judgment they have no obligation to seek the continuation of the injunction made by Black J. It is clear that the criminal justice agencies have all the necessary powers. Moreover Parliament has committed to the Director of Public Prosecutions the discretion as to whether to permit a prosecution. Both those points militate strongly against the intervention of the civil remedy of an injunction. The local authority have made it clear that if they are under no duty to seek the continuation of the injunction, they do not wish to do so.