LSS v LN, LG and Public Guardian

In the case of LSS v LN, LG, and Public Guardian, the appellant, LSS, sought to appeal a decision made by the tribunal which expanded the guardianship appointment of LN over LG, an adult who had previously been found to lack capacity. The tribunal had added provisions for accommodation and contact to the existing guardianship order. LSS, who was not the adult in question, the original applicant, nor a party whose power was altered or removed, contested the tribunal's decision on the basis that the evidence did not support the decision to expand the guardianship appointment and questioned the grounds for granting leave to appeal. The court was required to determine whether the evidence indeed supported the tribunal's decision and if there were valid grounds for allowing the appeal.

The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of the term "eligible person" in the context of standing to appeal. Specifically, the court had to ascertain whether LSS, despite not being the adult or the original applicant, and not having had any powers changed or removed, had standing to appeal. Additionally, the court examined whether the evidence provided to the tribunal was sufficient to justify the expansion of the guardianship order, including the new provisions for accommodation and contact.

The court found that the term "eligible person" was not strictly defined in the relevant legislation, allowing for a broader interpretation that included LSS in this instance. The court held that LSS had standing to appeal as it was in the interests of justice to do so, particularly given the significant impact the expanded guardianship order would have on LG's life. Furthermore, the court concluded that the evidence did support the tribunal's decision to expand the guardianship, as it was in the best interests of LG, and therefore denied leave to appeal on the basis of insufficient evidence.

The court granted leave to appeal, allowing LSS to challenge the tribunal's decision regarding the expanded guardianship appointment. This decision recognised the importance of ensuring that any changes to guardianship orders are well-supported by evidence and in the best interests of the adult lacking capacity.