Open justice | Let us know if you have a tribunal decision you would like to publish (see Re A)
Email updates | CPD scheme

Online forum | Latest topic on forum: Has the safeguard preventing consecutive detained patient paper hearings been affected by tribunal rule amendment? | News

R (C) v SSJ (2014) EWCA Civ 1009: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Case
{{Case
|Date=2014
|Date=2014/07/16
|NCN=[2014] EWCA Civ 1009
|NCN=[2014] EWCA Civ 1009
|Other citations=[2014] MHLO 90
|Other citations=[2014] MHLO 90
Line 6: Line 6:
|Judges=Dyson, Maurice Kay, Floyd
|Judges=Dyson, Maurice Kay, Floyd
|Parties=X, C, Secretary of State for Justice
|Parties=X, C, Secretary of State for Justice
|Judicial history=* [[R (C) v SSJ (2016) UKSC 2]]
* [[Re X (anonymity) (2014) EWCA Civ 1009, (2014) MHLO 90]]
* [2014] EWHC 167 (Admin)
|Judicial history first case=R (C) v SSJ (2014) EWHC 167 (Admin)
|Judicial history first case=R (C) v SSJ (2014) EWHC 167 (Admin)
|Sentence=Anonymity
|Sentence=Anonymity
|Summary=The press has reported this case as follows: a restricted transferred prisoner patient in medium security judicially reviewed the Secretary of State's refusal to grant permission for unescorted community leave; Cranston J refused to make an anonymity order, a decision upheld by the Court of Appeal (Lord Dyson MR; Maurice Kay LJ, VP; Floyd LJ).
|Summary=The Administrative Court had not been wrong to refuse the patient an anonymity order in relation to his judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision about unescorted community leave.
|Detail===Note==
This judgment was finally published in 2023 after the Supreme Court secretariat had been asked about it for several years.
|External links=* {{link|http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/16/murderer-not-entitled-remain-anonymous-seeking-rehabilitation|Guardian, 'Murderer not entitled to remain anonymous while seeking rehabilitation' (Press Association, 16/7/14)|s}}
|External links=* {{link|http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/16/murderer-not-entitled-remain-anonymous-seeking-rehabilitation|Guardian, 'Murderer not entitled to remain anonymous while seeking rehabilitation' (Press Association, 16/7/14)|s}}
|Subject=Anonymisation cases
|Subject=Anonymisation cases
|News=No
|News=Yes
|RSS pubdate=2022/07/18 10:56:07 AM
|RSS pubdate=2022/07/18 10:56:07 AM
}}
}}

Revision as of 21:57, 15 March 2023

Anonymity The Administrative Court had not been wrong to refuse the patient an anonymity order in relation to his judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision about unescorted community leave.

Note

This judgment was finally published in 2023 after the Supreme Court secretariat had been asked about it for several years.

External links

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII

Subject(s):

  • Anonymisation cases🔍

Date: 16 July 2014🔍

Court: Court of Appeal (Civil Division)🔍

Judicial history:

Judge(s):

Parties:

Citation number(s):

What links here:

Published: 11/8/14 20:01

Cached: 2025-06-29 16:03:19

Retrieved from "https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/index.php?title=R_(C)_v_SSJ_(2014)_EWCA_Civ_1009&oldid=60343"