On 2 June 2026, the UK Supreme Court gave judgment in AGNI [2026] UKSC 16, changing how deprivation of liberty is identified for people who cannot consent to their care arrangements.
The judgment moves away from treating continuous supervision and control, together with a lack of freedom to leave, as a universal test in every setting. Whether Article 5 is engaged now requires a more contextual assessment.
What the judgment does not decide
A conclusion that a person is not legally deprived of their liberty does not establish that their care is safe, proportionate, person-centred or free from coercion, abuse or neglect. Wider legal duties and safeguarding procedures remain important.
Questions for practice
- What is the person’s day-to-day experience?
- Can they communicate distress, objection or a wish for change?
- Are restrictions, isolation, restraint or deterioration increasing?
- Are family knowledge, advocacy and trusted relationships considered?
- Who is responsible for reviewing the whole picture?
How LOOK can help
LOOK helps practitioners keep the wider safeguarding picture visible alongside the legal Article 5 assessment. It supports reflection through four connected lenses: Living Circumstances; Obstacles and Barriers; Ongoing Risks and Escalation; and Keeping the Person in View.
- What do the person’s living arrangements and restrictions mean in day-to-day practice?
- Could communication needs, disability, dependency or lack of advocacy limit how objection or distress is recognised?
- What do repeated concerns, increasing restrictions or changes in presentation show when considered together?
- Are the person’s views and the knowledge of family, carers and advocates being heard and connected with other information?
- Who is responsible for reviewing proportionality, safety and the developing whole picture?
LOOK does not determine whether a deprivation of liberty exists and does not replace legal advice, statutory assessment or safeguarding action.