GT Stewart Solicitors and Advocates, 'GT Stewart file claim for judicial review in the High Court challenging decision of the Law Society' (6/4/18)
JR of Law Society This announcement concludes: "The Law Society has not published detailed guidance on what areas are accepted to be mental health law-‘related’. However, in its published ‘expected standards of competence’, applicants are expected to have sufficient knowledge of areas of law, such as mental capacity, community care and human rights, which are relevant to advising and representing clients in proceedings before the First-tier Tribunal. Rebecca maintains that the courses which she undertook came squarely within the competencies required and that the Law Society’s decision to refuse her application for reaccreditation to the Mental Health Accreditation Scheme is unlawful."
Text of announcement
GT Stewart Solicitors have filed a claim for judicial review in the High Court challenging the decision of the Law Society to refuse to allow one of its employees application for reaccreditation on the Mental Health Accreditation Scheme. From August 2014, it has been a requirement of the Legal Aid Agency that all publicly funded representatives in proceedings before the First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health) are members of the Law Society’s Mental Health Accreditation Scheme. The Law Society accepts that Rebecca Hill completed Professional Development hours in the preceding three years to her application for reaccreditation. However it does not accept that all of the training undertaken was ‘mental health law related’ and took the decision to refuse her application. The Law Society has not published detailed guidance on what areas are accepted to be mental health law-‘related’. However, in its published ‘expected standards of competence’, applicants are expected to have sufficient knowledge of areas of law, such as mental capacity, community care and human rights, which are relevant to advising and representing clients in proceedings before the First-tier Tribunal. Rebecca maintains that the courses which she undertook came squarely within the competencies required and that the Law Society’s decision to refuse her application for reaccreditation to the Mental Health Accreditation Scheme is unlawful.
See also
Law Society mental health accreditation scheme - CPD requirements