R (H) v MHRT (2000) EWHC 646 (Admin): Difference between revisions
m (Text replacement - "{{stub}} " to "") |
m (Text replacement - "\[http:\/\/www\.bailii\.org\/ew\/cases\/EWHC\/(.*)\/(.*)\/(.*)\.html Bailii\]" to "{{#bailii:[$2] EWHC $3 ($1)}}") |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==External link== | ==External link== | ||
[ | {{#bailii:[2000] EWHC 646 (Admin)}} | ||
Latest revision as of 10:39, 25 April 2021
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: