Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust & Anor v EG [2021] EWHC 2990 (Fam)

DOL during conditional discharge This decision demonstrates the Heath Robinson nature of today's mental health law. (1) The Supreme Court decision in MM meant that the patient could no longer remain conditionally discharged because he was being deprived of his liberty within the meaning of Article 5, so he was made subject to a "technical recall" and remained in the community on s17 leave under the same conditions. (2) The MHT then conditionally discharged him again, having correctly applied other domestic case law, because he was receiving no treatment in hospital so could not remain on s17 leave. (3) The SSJ would recall him to hospital if DOL in the community could not be authorised. (4) The court held that this outcome would violate the patient's Article 5(1) rights because being in hospital, even as an out-patient, was counter-therapeutic. (5) In order to avoid this violation, s72 should be read and given effect under s3 Human Rights Act 1998 so that "suffering from mental disorder ... which makes it appropriate for him to be liable to be detained in a hospital for medical treatment" includes liability to be "detained for treatment", even where that treatment is being provided in the community, so long as it could lawfully be provided in hospital. (6) Obiter, the inherent jurisdiction does not extend to depriving a person with capacity of his liberty, so could not have been used in this case.

Illustration

Click to enlarge

Source: W Heath Robinson, Inventions (Duckworth 1973). Click image to enlarge.

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII

Subject(s):

Date: 9/11/21🔍

Court: High Court (Family Division)🔍

Cites:

Judge(s):

Parties:

  • Cumbria Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Trust🔍
  • Secretary of State for Justice🔍
  • EG🔍

Citation number(s):

What links here:

Published: 16/11/21 23:08

Cached: 2021-11-30 00:12:45