R (Ashworth) v MHRT; R (H) v Ashworth (2001) EWHC Admin 901: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
{{#bailii:[2001] EWHC Admin 901}} | |||
[[Category:Re-sectioning after hearing]] | |||
[[Category: Re-sectioning after hearing]] | |||
[[Category:Brief summary]] | [[Category:Brief summary]] | ||
[[Category:Transcript]] | [[Category:Transcript]] | ||
[[Category:2001 cases]] | [[Category:2001 cases]] | ||
Revision as of 19:07, 25 April 2021
JR of MHRT discharge: immediate discharge when no aftercare available; decision irrational; reasons inadequate. JR of subsequent re-sectioning: lawful, considering Brandenburg CA decision; legal advice on lawfulness of MHRT decision relevant; stay ineffective when discharge was immediate.
Related cases
See Court of Appeal judgment in this case: R (Ashworth) v MHRT; R (H) v Ashworth [2002] EWCA Civ 923
External links
The following categories (in blue boxes) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: