Mental Capacity Assessment Review
When you need a critical review of a mental capacity assessment report for litigation, the detail matters. Whether you’re challenging an opposing conclusion (often a local authority assessment) or quality-assuring capacity evidence before it’s relied upon, the report must be decision-specific, MCA-compliant, and properly evidenced. Court timetables don’t wait - your capacity evidence has to withstand scrutiny.
Trusted by Thousands. Guided by Experience. Committed to You.
6000+
Over 6000 Assesments completed
50+ Years
Combined Expertise
99%
Client Satisfaction
100%
Coverage of England & Wales
4.9 ⭐
Request a Litigation Critical Review
Provide the report and instructions and we’ll issue a critical review memorandum aligned to MCA compliance and decision-specific reasoning.
Choose Your CPR Part 35
Compliant Critical Review
Full Critical Review
-
Full review of the capacity assessment report and supporting documents (as provided)
-
Detailed critical analysis of:
-
MCA compliance and statutory principles
-
Decision-specificity and time-specificity
-
Functional test evidence (understand / retain / use & weigh / communicate)
-
Causative nexus (impairment → inability) and reasoning/evidence chain
-
Clear identification of:
-
Strengths within the report
-
Weaknesses / vulnerabilities / omissions
-
Unsupported conclusions or gaps in evidence
-
A structured Schedule of Issues & Clarification Questions for the author/assessor
-
Written Full Critical Review Report (typically 8–12 pages)
Best for
Contested proceedings and complex disputes where the capacity assessment report is central to the litigation strategy, likely to be challenged, or requires detailed MCA compliance analysis and evidence-based scrutiny.
Report Appraisal
-
Review of the capacity assessment report (as provided)
-
Structured critique of methodology, MCA application, and reasoning
-
Clear summary of the report’s strengths and vulnerabilities
-
Clarification questions / issues to put to the author (where needed)
-
Written Critical Review Report (2–4 pages)
Best for
Early-stage litigation strategy, initial case analysis, or where you need a focused, cost-effective review before commissioning further expert input.
How to Instruct (What We Need)
1) Send
-
The capacity assessment report (PDF/Word)
-
Letter of instruction / issues list (if available)
-
Key pleadings / position statements (if relevant)
-
Any core supporting records you want considered (bundle)
2) We confirm
-
Scope (Option 1 or 2 + document limits)
-
Fee and turnaround
-
Any conflicts / independence checks
3) We deliver
-
CPR Part 35–compliant critical review report
-
Schedule of issues + clarification questions
-
(Optional) follow-up conference / addendum
4) Scope & Boundaries
-
We review the report and reasoning, not the assessor personally
-
We don’t re-assess the person unless separately instructed
-
We can comment on MCA compliance, methodology, evidence chain, decision-specificity
-
We will say if the material is insufficient to reach a reliable view
What We Review (MCA Compliance & Evidence Checklist)
Our CPR Part 35–compliant critical reviews focus on whether the mental capacity assessment report demonstrates a lawful, decision-specific and properly evidenced application of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We assess the quality of the written report and reasoning—not the assessor personally.
We typically review the report against the following MCA compliance and evidence checklist:
-
Decision-specificity – whether the assessment identifies the exact decision being assessed (and avoids overly broad conclusions).
-
Time-specificity – whether capacity is considered at the relevant material time, with a clear rationale.
-
Application of MCA principles – including presumption of capacity, support to decide, and whether an unwise decision has been wrongly treated as incapacity.
-
Two-stage test compliance – whether the report clearly evidences both the impairment/disturbance and the functional impact on decision-making.
-
Functional test evidence – whether the report provides decision-specific evidence for:
-
understanding the relevant information
-
retaining the relevant information
-
using and weighing the relevant information
-
communicating the decision
-
-
Causative nexus (impairment → inability) – whether the report shows a defensible link between any impairment and the functional inability relied upon.
-
Support to make the decision – whether reasonable steps were taken to support the person to decide (and whether this is evidenced).
-
Reasoning and evidential chain – whether conclusions are supported by observations, examples, and recorded evidence rather than assertion.
-
Consistency and clarity – whether the report is internally consistent, coherent, and clearly explains how the conclusion was reached.
-
Proportionality and scope – whether the assessment stays within its remit and avoids drifting into best interests conclusions.
Where appropriate, we identify strengths, weaknesses, omissions, and points requiring clarification, and provide structured questions that may be put to the author/assessor in litigation.
Looking for something else?
If you’re unsure whether a critical review of a mental capacity assessment report is the right instruction, we may still be able to help. Nellie Supports provides a range of capacity assessment and litigation support services across England and Wales.
You may be looking for:
-
A new mental capacity assessment (fresh assessment and report)
-
A COP3 mental capacity assessment for Court of Protection applications
-
A care needs court report for wider litigation issues
If you’d like, send a brief summary of the matter and we’ll advise which service is most appropriate and confirm the best next step.
A critical review is an independent analysis of a third-party mental capacity assessment report, focusing on Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) compliance, decision-specific reasoning, the functional test evidence, and whether conclusions are properly supported by an evidential chain. It is a review of the report and reasoning, not the assessor personally.
Yes. Both Option 1 and Option 2 are provided as CPR Part 35–compliant reports, with the appropriate expert statement and an independent, objective approach consistent with an expert’s duties.
Yes. We are frequently instructed to provide a critical review of Local Authority mental capacity assessments, including where a council report is relied upon in contested matters and the capacity evidence needs to be tested for MCA compliance and decision-specific reasoning.
This service is a report review / paper-based critical analysis. We do not re-assess the person as part of this instruction unless separately instructed to undertake a fresh assessment. The output focuses on what the existing report does (and does not) evidence.
At minimum, we need the capacity assessment report being reviewed and the letter of instruction / key issues. For Option 2, we also recommend any key supporting materials the report relies upon (e.g., care notes, medical records excerpts, social work records, or relevant statements), so the review is properly grounded.
You will receive a structured analysis of strengths and weaknesses, plus clarification questions / a schedule of issues that can be put to the author/assessor. The review is designed to help solicitors test reliability, identify omissions, and support decisions about further evidence, conferences, joint statements, or cross-examination.
Option 1 is a focused 2–4 page CPR Part 35–compliant review of the report itself, highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and clarification questions.
Option 2 is a fuller, litigation-focused critical analysis (typically 8–12 pages) reviewing the report alongside relevant supporting documents, with a detailed MCA compliance analysis and a fuller schedule of issues.We review whether the report demonstrates a lawful approach under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, including: decision- and time-specificity, proper use of the two-stage test, evidence for each element of the functional test (understand/retain/use & weigh/communicate), and a clear causative nexus between impairment and inability.
Yes, subject to capacity and bundle size. If you have a hearing date or directions timetable, we can usually offer an expedited turnaround. We will confirm scope, fee and delivery date at the point of instruction.
No. Our service is not a critique of the assessor as a person. We provide an independent review of the content of the report—its methodology, MCA reasoning, evidence base, and whether the conclusions are properly supported