View source for R (Afework) v LB Camden (2013) EWHC 1637 (Admin), (2013) MHLO 51

''The judge held that as a matter of law s117(2) is only engaged vis-à-vis accommodation if: '(i) The need for accommodation is a direct result of the reason that the ex-patient was detained in the first place ("the original condition"); (ii) The requirement is for enhanced specialised accommodation to meet needs directly arising from the original condition; and (iii) The ex-patient is being placed in the accommodation on an involuntary (in the sense of being incapacitated) basis arising as a result of the original condition.' No obvious reason is given for the third requirement, which is probably wrongly decided (or, as the COP Newsletter puts it, 'will fall to be considered again in due course').''

==MHLR==
{{MHLR|2014|32}}

==External links==
{{#bailii:(2013) EWHC 1637 (Admin)}}

[http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?id=14701 Lee Parkhill, 'The scope of section 117 after-care and accommodation' (Local Government Lawyer, 4/7/13)]

[[Category:After-care]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2013 cases]]