Change of status after application made
The pages below are initially ordered according to the dates on which they were added to the site (most recent first). The order can be changed by clicking on the symbol beside a column heading: click on the symbol beside "Page and summary" for alphabetical order; click beside "Categories" for the order in which the cases were reported. Click on the arrow symbol again to reverse the order. Click on a page name to view the relevant page.
|Page and summary||Date added to site||Categories|
|KF v Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust  UKUT 185 (AAC) — Various issues including (1) what should happen where an appeal from a First-tier Tribunal's substantive decision on a s2 application is overtaken by events and (2) whether a s3 reference to the First-tier Tribunal lapse once a CTO is made. [Summary required.]||2010-06-18||2010 cases, Change of status after application made, No summary, Transcript, Upper Tribunal decisions|
|AA v Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust  UKUT 195 (AAC) — An application made while a patient is detained under section 2 or 3 does not lapse when the patient is made subject to a CTO, as s72(1) (powers of tribunals) should be given a literal construction. Preliminary points: (1) Discussion on Law Society guidance and cases where client lacks full capacity. The Upper Tribunal has no power to appoint a litigation friend or equivalent, and the OS's powers and duties apply to court proceedings not tribunals; in any event, justice did not require a litigation friend as the potential "best interests" argument was argued by other parties. (2) It was not unlawful for a First-tier Tribunal judge to consider an application for permission to appeal from, or a review of, his own decision.||2009-10-13||2009 cases, Brief summary, Change of status after application made, Transcript, Upper Tribunal decisions|
|R (MN) v MHRT  EWHC 3383 (Admin) — Tribunal application made under s70 when patient subject to s47/49 (restricted transfer direction) lapses when s49 (restriction direction) lapses; to avoid delay, the application can be treated as if it were an application under s69(2)(a).||2008-12-22||2008 cases, Change of status after application made, Detailed summary, Transcript|
|R (M) v South Thames MHRT  EWHC Admin 797 — Tribunal application made while under s2 does not fall if the patient is subsequently placed under s3; patient maintains his separate right to apply under while s3.||2006-04-20||1997 cases, Change of status after application made, Detailed summary, Transcript|
|R (SR) v MHRT  EWHC 2923 (Admin) — MHRT application appealing against s3 falls when patient subsequently made subject to s25A; fresh application required.||2006-04-19||2005 cases, Change of status after application made, Detailed summary, Transcript|
The following 5 pages are in this category.