R (H) v MHRT (2000) EWHC 646 (Admin): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "{{stub}} " to "") |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
[http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2000/646.html Bailii] | [http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2000/646.html Bailii] | ||
[[Category:Other NR cases]] | [[Category:Other NR cases]] | ||
Revision as of 21:21, 26 May 2015
The MHRT should not have informed the nearest relative of restricted patient [or, more correctly, the person who would have been the nearest relative had the patient not been restricted] of the forthcoming hearing, because the definition of "nearest relative" in the Tribunal rules excluded restricted patients; the injunction preventing the Tribunal from disclosing its final decision would continue.
Citations
[2000] MHLR 203
External link
The following categories (in blue boxes) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: