Mental Health Law Online

Revision as of 01:16, 2 December 2009 by Jonathan (Talk | contribs)

An internet resource on mental health law in England & Wales, primarily for mental health practitioners, to which anyone can contribute.

There are currently three sections to this website which are developing into the following:

1. Case law		2. Legislation		3. General information
Regularly updated commentaries on the cases, with links to the full text judgments on Bailii. (Currently 813 categorised cases)		The full text of, and a simple and up-to-date commentary on, the Mental Health Act 1983, the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and related legislation.		General articles to explain the concepts and terminology used in the caselaw and legislation sections; and practical guidance for lawyers

You are encouraged to sign up for free email updates and the CPD scheme (12 CPD points for £50)

Contributing to the site is simple: see the help page. Please browse through the recommended books.

Recent updates

06/09/10: CLS News item "Law Society Judicial Review of family tender" published on 6/9/10. Current contracts will now expire on Sunday 14/11/10; new contracts will commence on 15/11/10; current contact holders will receive an additional 1/12 of their matter start allocation. See Legal Aid News

05/09/10: CPD questionnaires have been added for all months up to and including August 2010. For £50 you can earn 12 CPD credits online. The subscription can straddle two CPD years: for instance, if you only need 4 more hours this year, you can do 4 tests at any time before November and 8 tests after. See CPD scheme

05/09/10: Case summary added. LM v MHTS (2010) ScotSC x — The appellant had been subject to a Short-Term Detention Certificate (STDC), which was followed by an (unlawful) Extension Certificate, which was then followed by a subsequent STDC. Section 44(2) Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 prohibits the granting of a STDC when the patient is subject to an Extension Certificate. An application under s50 was made to revoke the second STDC; the MHTS considered the detention criteria and refused the application. This decision was subject to an appeal to the Sheriff Principal who held that as the appellant had not been "subject to" the Extension Certificate (it being unlawful) the second STDC was valid. The Sheriff noted that the appellant could have made an application in terms of section 291 to challenge the lawfulness of his detention; this option met Article 5 requirements and would have been more appropriate as the detaining party would have been the respondent.

More updates...