Supreme Court DoLS Ruling

Supreme Court DoLS ruling: what has changed?

Updated 30 June 2026: Government guidance published

This article has been expanded following the publication of Government guidance on the Supreme Court judgment.

A landmark Supreme Court judgement could lead to major changes in how the law protects people who lack mental capacity and are living in care homes, supported living services, hospitals or other care settings.

The ruling overturns a key part of the 2014 Cheshire West judgement, which established the legal test used to decide whether a person is being deprived of their liberty and therefore requires formal safeguards.
 

Significance of Cheshire West

For more than a decade, the Cheshire West decision has provided the basis for the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) system in England and Wales. Under that framework, a person was generally considered deprived of their liberty if they were under continuous supervision and control, were not free to leave, and lacked the capacity to consent to the arrangements.

The Supreme Court has now concluded that the Cheshire West approach was too broad and should no longer be applied in the same way.

Why does this matter?

DoLS exist to ensure that people who cannot make decisions about their own care still have legal protections when restrictions are placed on their lives.

These safeguards can include:

• Independent assessments
• Regular reviews of care arrangements
• Access to advocacy services
• The ability to challenge restrictions through the courts
• Independent scrutiny of whether restrictions are necessary and proportionate
 

 

What does the Supreme Court ruling mean?

While the decision is unlikely to affect day-to-day care immediately, it could change who is entitled to the legal protections that DoLS provide.

The Government has now published interim guidance confirming that the new legal definition applies immediately across the UK while more detailed guidance is prepared. Care providers, local authorities and NHS organisations are being advised to review their policies and individual cases in light of the judgment.

While the decision is unlikely to affect day-to-day care immediately, it could change who is entitled to the legal protections that DoLS provide.

The Government has now published interim guidance confirming that the new legal definition applies immediately across the UK while more detailed guidance is prepared. Care providers, local authorities and NHS organisations are being advised to review their policies and individual cases in light of the judgment.
 

What has changed?

The Supreme Court has ruled that the previous “acid test” was too broad and should no longer be used on its own.

Instead, professionals must now consider a range of factors when deciding whether someone is deprived of their liberty. These include the person’s individual circumstances, the nature and intensity of any restrictions, and importantly, whether they are able to express acceptance of their care arrangements through their wishes and feelings.

The Government says this more holistic approach is likely to reduce the number of DoLS authorisations over time.
 

Should families be worried?

For many people, nothing will change immediately. Existing DoLS authorisations remain in place until they can be reviewed, and the Government has said that providers should take a proportionate approach while new guidance is developed.

However, disability organisations have expressed concern that fewer people may now qualify for independent legal safeguards.

Charities including Mind, Mencap, the National Autistic Society and the Challenging Behaviour Foundation argue that independent assessments and advocacy are particularly important for people who cannot easily communicate concerns or who appear content with their care arrangements, even if restrictions are significant.
 

Five questions families may want to ask…

If your relative currently has a DoLS authorisation, or you think they may need one in future, it may be worth asking their care provider or local authority some key questions:

• Will this Supreme Court ruling affect their current DoLS authorisation?
• When will their care arrangements next be reviewed?
• How will their wishes and feelings be taken into account?
• Who can I contact if I disagree with a decision?
• Will they still have access to advocacy or other independent support if their DoLS authorisation ends?

Keeping a record of discussions and asking for decisions to be explained in writing can help families understand how the new guidance is being applied.
 

 

What happens next?

The Government has acknowledged that the judgment has wide-ranging implications and says further guidance will follow.

The ruling has also renewed attention on Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS), a replacement system for DoLS that Parliament approved in 2019 but which has never been brought into force. Many organisations are now calling on ministers to clarify how people’s rights will continue to be protected under the new legal framework.

In the meantime, experts stress that families should not assume legal protections have disappeared. Instead, they should stay engaged with care providers, ask questions where necessary and seek independent advice if they have concerns about a loved one’s care arrangements.

Narrower definition in future

The Supreme Court’s decision means that some people who would previously have been regarded as deprived of their liberty may no longer fall within that definition.

Supporters of the change argue that the previous system captured too many people, creating huge administrative burdens for local authorities and care providers. Long waiting lists for assessments have become common across the country.

However, disability organisations and mental health charities have warned that the ruling could remove important protections from many vulnerable people.

Concerns from charities

National charities including Mind, Mencap and the National Autistic Society have expressed alarm at the judgement.

They argue that the Cheshire West safeguards were designed to protect people who may appear content with their care arrangements but who nevertheless have significant restrictions placed on their freedom.

The charities warn that narrowing the legal definition of deprivation of liberty could leave some people without access to independent scrutiny, advocacy and legal safeguards.

The Challenging Behaviour Foundation said it was concerned that important protections could disappear before replacement arrangements are clearly established.

Harriet Edwards, Director of Influencing at the national disability charity Sense, said:

“This judgement is a major blow to the rights of disabled people with complex needs and risks reversing decades of progress.

“It raises serious concerns about the future rights of disabled people with complex needs and risks moving us further away from a social care system that empowers people to live with freedom, choice and control over their own lives.

“We are concerned that the Court has weakened the independent safeguards that play a vital role in protecting disabled people from abuse, neglect and inappropriate restrictions on their liberty.

“Disabled people with complex needs have the same right as everyone else to dignity, autonomy and control over their own lives. At a time when we should be building a more ambitious and inclusive adult social care system, this decision risks moving us in the wrong direction.

“We join the National Autistic Society, Mencap and Mind in calling on the UK Government to provide clarity to local authorities and care providers on how the rights of disabled people with complex needs can be strengthened and protected. As the implications of this judgement become clearer, it is essential that people’s rights and freedoms are not diluted and that robust safeguards remain in place.”

Looking ahead

The Government is preparing to consult on Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS), a replacement system that has been planned for several years but has not yet been implemented.

In the short term, families may find that some existing DoLS assessments, reviews or authorisations are reconsidered as organisations work through the implications of the ruling.

For disabled people, people with dementia, people with learning disabilities and their families, the judgement raises important questions about how the balance should be struck between protecting personal freedom and ensuring vulnerable people continue to benefit from robust legal safeguards.

The debate is likely to continue for some time as governments, courts, care providers and disability organisations assess the consequences of one of the most significant mental capacity rulings in more than a decade.
 

Article ends – click to return to top or check out related resources below

Further reading and resources

Mental Capacity Act reform stalled

Make sure you don’t miss out on news from Independent Living

return to top