R (AL) v SSHD (2005) EWCA Civ 2: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
== Decision == | == Decision == | ||
Recall lawful. Client was s5 CPIA 1964 so not classified in the first place | Recall lawful. Client was s5 CPIA 1964 so not classified in the first place. Would have been lawful even if s37/41. | ||
== External links == | == External links == | ||
[http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/2.html Bailii] | [http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/2.html Bailii] | ||
Revision as of 16:17, 6 May 2006
Can be recalled for any mental disorder.
Facts
Client recalled for different disorder to that which he was 'classified' as suffering from when conditionally discharged.
Decision
Recall lawful. Client was s5 CPIA 1964 so not classified in the first place. Would have been lawful even if s37/41.