|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| Alternative formats (via Amazon): '''{{amazon|1482058022|Paperback|x}} | {{Amazon|B007GQ7F54|Kindle|x}}'''
| | #redirect[[Annual Review]] |
| | |
| See also: [[Annual Review 2012]]
| |
| | |
| ==Introduction==
| |
| The 'Annual Review 2011' contains all Mental Health Law Online news which appeared in the monthly updates for 2011. The online version will be updated automatically when case/legislation pages are updated, whereas the PDF version will remain static. The PDF version contains hyperlinks in the usual way. Brief summaries are featured here, and further details (including detailed summaries and case transcripts) can be read by clicking on the relevant links. This will be an annual publication, so comments and suggestions are welcome: contact the author, Jonathan Wilson, at jonathan@mentalhealthlaw.co.uk
| |
| | |
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-width:1px;">The Mental Health Law Online CPD scheme enables you to obtain 12 CPD points per year by completing multiple-choice questionnaires based on the monthly updates. It is suitable for solicitors (SRA-accredited), barristers (established practitioners), psychiatrists, social workers and psychiatric nurses. For further details see [http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/cpd/ CPD scheme]</div>
| |
| | |
| ==Cases==
| |
| The cases are set out below in rough categories, and alphabetically within categories. The categories are: Mental health cases, including Tribunal; Mental capacity cases, including Court of Protection; Criminal law cases; Lasting Power of Attorney cases; Enduring Power of Attorney cases; Other cases, including community care; Scotland and Northern Ireland.
| |
| | |
| ===Mental health cases, including Tribunal===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|AH v West London MH NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 74 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|CB v Sussex County Council (2010) UKUT 413 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|CM v Derbyshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (2011) UKUT 129 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|CX v A Local Authority (2011) EWHC 1918 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|DL v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (2010) UKUT 455 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|DN v Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust (2011) UKUT 327 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|DP v South Tyneside DC (2011) Admin Court 14/7/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|JLG v Managers of Llanarth Court (2011) UKUT 62 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|JP v Birmingham and Solihull MH NHS Trust (2010) Upper Tribunal 30/7/10 (HM/535/2010)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|KL v Somerset Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (2011) UKUT 233 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|LS v LB Lambeth (HB) (2010) UKUT 461 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Massie v H (2011) EWCA Civ 115}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|MB v BEH MH NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 328 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|MP v Mersey Care NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 107 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|PS v Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust (2011) UKUT 143 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Baisden) v Leicester City Council (2011) EWHC 3219 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Cart) v Upper Tribunal (2011) UKSC 28}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (G) v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWHC 747 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Hertfordshire CC) v LB Hammersmith and Fulham (2011) EWCA Civ 77}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Modaresi) v SSH (2011) EWCA Civ 1359}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Modaresi) v SSH (2011) EWHC 417 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Sessay) v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWHC 2617 (QB)}}.
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Smith) v LB Camden (2011) EWCA Civ 1207}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (SP) v SSJ (2010) EWCA Civ 1590}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Sunderland City Council) v South Tyneside Council (2011) EWHC 2355 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|RB v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 135 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|RB v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 73 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Ian Brady (2011) First-tier Tribunal 17/10/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|RN v Curo Care (2011) UKUT 263 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Ross v SSWP (2011) UKFTT 8/8/11 (SEC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|SSJ v RB (2010) UKUT 454 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|SSJ v RB (2011) EWCA Civ 1608}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|TR v Ludlow Street Healthcare Ltd (2011) UKUT 152 (AAC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|TTM v LB Hackney (2011) EWCA Civ 4}}
| |
| | |
| ===Mental capacity cases, including Court of Protection===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|A Council v X (2011) EWHC B10 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|A Local Authority v DL (2011) EWHC 1022 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|A London Local Authority v JH (2011) EWHC 2420 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|An NHS Foundation Trust v D (2010) EWHC 2535 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Cardiff Council v Peggy Ross (2011) COP 28/10/11 12063905}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1333}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1257}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWHC 1330 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Dunhill v Burgin (2011) EWHC 464 (QB)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|G v E (2010) EWHC 3385 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|KY v DD (2011) EWHC 1277 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|LB Tower Hamlets v BB (2011) EWHC 2853 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|LG v DK (2011) EWHC 2453 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Manchester City Council v G (2011) EWCA Civ 939}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|P v Independent Print Ltd (2011) EWCA Civ 756}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Quigley v Masterson (2011) EWHC 2529 (Ch)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re A; A v A Local Authority (2011) EWHC 727 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re AB; AB v LCC (A Local Authority) (2011) EWHC 3151 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re AB; D Borough Council v AB (2011) EWHC 101 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re AH; AH v Hertfordshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWHC 276 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re AM; B (A Local Authority) v RM (2010) EWHC 3802 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re AVS; AVS v A NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWCA Civ 7}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re C; C v Wigan Borough Council (2011) EWHC 1539 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re CM; LBB v JM (2010) COP 5/2/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re CW; A Primary Care Trust v CW (2010) EWHC 3448 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re DU; A NHS Trust v DU (2009) EWHC 3504 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re FL; HN v FL and Hampshire CC (2011) EWHC 2894 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re GM; FP v GM and A Health Board (2011) EWHC 2778 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re HM; PM v KH (2010) EWHC 2107 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re HM; PM v KH (2010) EWHC 3279 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re HM; SM v HM (2011) COP 11875043 4/11/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re JP; DP v JCP (2010) COP 11692737}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re KM; NCC v KM (2009) COP 1145479102}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re LD; London Borough of Havering v LD and KD (2010) EWHC 3876 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re M; W v M (2011) EWHC 1197 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re M; W v M (2011) EWHC 2443 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re P (2010) COP 23/12/10 (Mostyn J)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re P and Q; P and Q v Surrey County Council; sub nom Re MIG and MEG (2011) EWCA Civ 190}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re P; A Local Authority v PB (2011) EWHC 2675 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re P; A Local Authority v PB (2011) EWHC 502 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re PH; PH v A Local Authority (2011) EWHC 1704 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 1) (2010) EWHC 2423 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 2) (2011) EWHC 112 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 3) (2011) EWHC 2576 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 4) (2011) EWHC 3017 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re RK; RK v BCC (2011) EWCA Civ 1305}} (NB Transcript revised to contain concurring judgments of Gross and Baron LJJ.)
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re RK; YB v BCC (2010) EWHC 3355 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re S; D v R (the deputy of S) (2010) EWHC 3748 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Steven Neary; LB Hillingdon v Steven Neary (2011) EWHC 1377 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Steven Neary; LB Hillingdon v Steven Neary (2011) EWHC 413 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Sharma v Hunters (2011) EWHC 2546 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|SMBC v WMP (2011) EWHC B13 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|V v R (2011) EWHC 822 (QB)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|WCC v GS (2011) EWHC 2244 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Wychavon District Council v EM (HB) (2011) UKUT 144 (AAC)}}
| |
| | |
| ===Criminal law cases===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|AG's ref (no 54 of 2011) (2011) EWCA Crim 2276}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Abdi (2011) EWCA Crim 2179}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Clark (2011) EWCA Crim 2516}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Goucher (2011) EWCA Crim 1456}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Goucher (2011) EWCA Crim 2473}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Heaney (2011) EWCA Crim 2682}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v PA (2010) EWCA Crim 3121}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Hopkins; R v Priest (2011) EWCA Crim 1513}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Inglis (2010) EWCA Crim 2269}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Lavender (2011) EWCA Crim 2420}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v O (2011) EWCA Crim 376}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Shah (2011) EWCA Crim 2333}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R v Welsh (2011) EWCA Crim 73}}
| |
| | |
| ===Lasting Power of Attorney cases===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Baker (2011) COP 4/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Brindley (2011) COP 11/5/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Careford (2011) COP 16/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Clare (2011) COP 8/9/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Clarke (2011) COP 19/9/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Cranston (2011) COP 18/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Cretney (2011) COP 24/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Dadd (2010) COP 17/10/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Dhir (2011) COP 15/11/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Druce (2011) COP 31/5/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Fisher (2011) COP 28/7/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Freeman (2011) COP 17/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Gardner (2011) COP 6/7/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Gee (2011) COP 22/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Hamilton (2011) COP 25/10/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Hodgkiss (2011) COP 25/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Hurren (2011) COP 28/9/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Ingham (2011) COP 15/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re J (2010) MHLO 167 (COP)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Jackson (2011) COP 17/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Knight (2011) COP 18/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re McGregor (2011) COP 16/11/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re McKenna (2011) COP 1/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Munn (2011) COP 28/1/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Noel (2011) COP 31/1/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Parker (2011) COP 18/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Parsonage (2011) COP 1/4/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Pugh (2011) COP 13/7/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Putt (2011) COP 22/3/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Salter (2011) COP 18/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Scott (2011) COP 11/1/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Scragg (2011) COP 1/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Steiner (2011) COP 17/10/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Stewart (2011) COP 9/11/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Temple (2011) COP 10/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Walker (2011) COP 20/7/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Warren (2010) COP 10/12/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Weyell (2010) COP 2/12/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Wheatley (2011) COP 31/1/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Wheeler (2011) COP 25/7/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Williams (2010) COP 1/12/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Wormsley (2011) COP 24/10/11}}
| |
| | |
| ===Enduring Power of Attorney cases===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Berg (2010) COP 31/12/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Donegan (2011) COP 6/1/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Harris (2011) COP 6/1/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Haworth (2010) COP 20/12/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Jarman (2011) COP 8/8/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Lodge (2010) COP 6/8/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Stevens (2011) COP 11/1/11}}
| |
| | |
| ===Other cases, including community care===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|All About Rights Law Practice v LSC (2011) EWHC 964 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Buckinghamshire CC v RB of Kingston upon Thames (2011) EWCA Civ 457}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|C v D (2011) EWCA Civ 646}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Clift v Slough BC (2010) EWCA Civ 1484}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|De Louville De Toucy v Bonhams 1793 Ltd (2011) EWHC 3809 (Ch)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Francis v GSCC (2010) UKFTT 434 (HESC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|G v MHTS (2011) CSIH 55}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|GSCC conduct committee decision: Philip Julian Davies 10/12/10}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Hackett v CPS (2011) EWHC 1170 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Hadzic and Suljic v Bosnia Herzegovina 39446/06 (2011) ECHR 911}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Haworth v Cartmel and HMRC (2011) EWHC 36 (Ch)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Hill v Fellowes Solicitors LLP (2011) EWHC 61 (QB)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Hossack v Legal Services Commission (2011) EWCA Civ 788}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Hossack v Legal Services Commission (2011) EWHC 2700 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Jones v Kaney (2011) UKSC 13}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Lumba (WL) v SSHD (2011) UKSC 12}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|M v F (2011) EWCA Civ 273}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Magritz v Public Prosecutors Office Bremen (2011) EWHC 1861 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|McKie v Swindon College (2011) EWHC 469 (QB)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|NMC Conduct and Competence Committee decision: Josiah Foeka Amara 18/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|PFZ v West London MH NHS Trust (2011) Settlement 28/11/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Pitt v Holt (2011) EWCA Civ 197}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Public Interest Lawyers v LSC (2010) EWHC 3277 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (AC) v Berkshire West PCT (2011) EWCA Civ 247}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (AK) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 3188 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (BA) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 2748 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Faulkner) v SSJ (2011) EWCA Civ 349}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (FB) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 2044 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Guntrip) v SSJ (2010) EWHC 3188 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (KM) v Cambridgeshire CC (2011) EWCA Civ 682}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (McDonald) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (2011) UKSC 33}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Monday) v SSHD (2010) EWHC 3079 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Nassery) v LB Brent (2011) EWCA Civ 539}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (O) v LB Hammersmith and Fulham (2011) EWCA Civ 925}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (PA) v Governor of Lewes Prison (2011) EWHC 704 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (S) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 2120 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (Sturnham) v SSJ (2011) EWHC 938 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (W) v Birmingham City Council (2011) EWHC 1147 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (W) v LB Croydon (2011) EWHC 696 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|R (WG) v Leicester City Council (2011) EWHC 189 (Admin)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re Hunt (2008) (Preston county court, 12/6/08)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re T (A child: murdered parent) (2011) EWHC B4 (Fam)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|S v Estonia 17779/08 (2011) ECHR 1511}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Salisu v SSH (2011) UKFTT 1 (HESC)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Selwood v Durham CC (2011) Newcastle-upon-Tyne county court 25/2/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|SL v Westminster City Council (2011) EWCA Civ 954}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|SSWP v Slavin (2011) EWCA Civ 1515}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|TW v A City Council (2011) EWCA Civ 17}}
| |
| | |
| ===Scotland and Northern Ireland===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|AB v MHTS (2011) ScotSC B694/11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Black v MHTS (2011) CSIH 83}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|JG v MHTS (2011) ScotSC 110}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|LA v MHTS (2011) ScotSC 119}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|LBN v Borland (Mental Health Officer) (2011) ScotSC 28}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re DC (Judicial Review) (2011) CSOH 193}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re JM (Variation and renewal of orders for guardianship made under provisions with minute to vary) (2011) ScotSC 107}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Re JR49 (Application for Judicial Review) (2011) NIQB 41}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Scottish Ministers v MHTS (2011) CSIH 76}}
| |
| | |
| ==Legislation==
| |
| The following legislation is listed in alphabetical order.
| |
| | |
| ===England and UK===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Access to Justice Act 1999 (Destination of Appeals) Order 2000}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Care Quality Commission (Additional Functions) Regulations 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Civil Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Community Legal Service (Funding) (Amendment No.2) Order 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Court of Protection (Amendment) Rules 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Family Procedure (Modification of Enactments) Order 2011/1045}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Consequential Amendments No.2) Order 2010}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Health and Social Care Bill 2010-11}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|High Security Psychiatric Services (Arrangements for Safety and Security at Ashworth, Broadmoor and Rampton Hospitals) Directions 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Legal Services Act 2007 (Consequential Amendments) Order 2009}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Mental Capacity Act 2005 (Appropriate Body) (England) Amendment Regulations 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Mental Health (Discrimination) Bill 2010}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Postal Services Act 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Public Guardian (Fees, etc.) (Amendment) Regulations 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Tribunal Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2011}}
| |
| | |
| ===Other jurisdictions===
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Mental Health (Assessment of Former Users of Secondary Mental Health Services) (Wales) Regulations 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Mental Health (Independent Mental Health Advocates) (Wales) Regulations 2011}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Northern Ireland Act 1998 (Devolution of Policing and Justice Functions) Order 2010}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Supervision and Treatment Orders (Maximum Period) Order (Northern Ireland) 2011}}
| |
| | |
| ===Further information===
| |
| *A Bill is currently being drafted to reduce the burden on the SOAD service by altering the certificate requirement for CTO patients: where the RC certifies that the patient has capacity there would be no need for a SOAD second opinion. See [[MHA 1983 s64C]]
| |
| *On 2/2/11 Nick Clegg MP announced that s141 (Members of Parliament suffering from mental illness) would be abolished. See [[MHA 1983 s141]]
| |
| *Second reading of Mental Health (Discrimination) Bill, Hansard HL Deb, 25 November 2011, col 1283. {{pagesummary|Mental Health (Discrimination) Bill 2010}}
| |
| *Second Reading of LAPSO Bill, Hansard HL Deb, 21 November 2011, col 820. See [[Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2011]]
| |
| *Hansard HL Deb, 26 October 2011, col 831. This is the transcript of a debate in the House of Lords on a motion to annul the Community Legal Service (Funding) (Amendment No.2) Order 2011 (the order which reduces civil fee rates by 10%); following the debate the motion was withdrawn. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *Mind, 'Health and Social Care Bill: Amendment 236B' (November 2011). Mind's proposal: 'Our amendment would still allow for the wording "Primary Care Trusts" to be replaced with "clinical commissioning groups" in the Mental Health Act, and for consequential amendments resulting from the abolition of PCTs. However, our amendment would: (1) Retain the joint duty on CCGs and social services authorities, (2) ensure that CCGs continue to arrange for provision of services under s117 in co-operation with relevant voluntary agencies, (3) ensure that the arrangement of services by CCGs under s117 are not limited to services arranged under section 3 or section 3A of the NHS Act (by deleting proposed subsection (2E)), (4) ensure that the duty on CCGs will not be regarded as a duty under section 3 NHS Act. This means it remains a freestanding duty under section 117 MHA, and the possibility of charging for aftercare is removed (by deleting proposed subsection (2F)).' See [[Mind (Charity)]]
| |
| *The text of the Mental Health Act 1983 on this website has been updated: (1) the [[Postal Services Act 2011]] amends [[s134]], with effect from 1/10/11; (2) the [[Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Consequential Amendments No.2) Order 2010]] amends [[s24]], [[s34]], [[s119]] and [[s145]], wef 1/10/10; (3) the [[Northern Ireland Act 1998 (Devolution of Policing and Justice Functions) Order 2010/976]] amends [[s82]], [[s82A]], [[s86]] and [[s139]], wef 12/4/10. See [[Mental Health Act 1983]]
| |
| | |
| ==Guidance and forms==
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Court of Protection Guidance: Applications to the Court of Protection in relation to tenancy agreements (June 2011)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Mrs Justice Pauffley, 'Guidance in cases involving protected parties in which the Official Solicitor is being invited to act as guardian ad litem or litigation friend' (December 2010)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Practice Direction (Upper Tribunal: Judicial Review Jurisdiction) (2009) 1 WLR 327}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Practice Statement: Composition of Tribunals in relation to matters that fall to be decided by the Health, Education and Social Care Chamber on or after 18/1/10 (16/12/09)}}
| |
| *{{pagesummary|Practice Note: Role of the Independent Mental Health Advocate in First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health) Hearings (May 2011)}}
| |
| *Mental Health Tribunal, 'CMR1: Case Management Request form'. This voluntary form, introduced in March 2011, is intended to ensure that applicants provide the necessary information under the Rules when applying for directions, postponement, prohibition or disclosure of information, wasted costs, permission to withdraw an application, or other interlocutory matters (such as appointment of a representative). The form provides guidance and explains where it should be sent. See [[Tribunal forms]]
| |
| *{{pagesummary|COP Practice Direction: Preparation of Bundles}} (draft)
| |
| | |
| ==Resources==
| |
| The publications are mostly categorised according to author or publisher, rather than topic.
| |
| | |
| ===Administrative Justice & Tribunals Council===
| |
| *AJTC and CQC, 'Patients' experiences of the First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health)' (30/3/11). The report contains recommendations under the following headings: (1) Referral to lawyers by hospitals; (2) Accreditation of lawyers; (3) Quality checking of lawyers by tribunal panels; (4) Information regarding delays; (5) Management information; (6) Cycle of delay; (7) Care plans and conditions; (8) Training for medical members; (9) Explanations of the purpose of the pre-hearing interview; (10) Timing of the medical examination; (11) Information regarding the hearing; (12) Access to reports; (13) Venue; (14) Opportunity for patients to speak; (15) Order of proceedings; (16) Treating patients appropriately; (17) Written copies of the decision; (18) Further explanations of the decision; (19) Right to appeal; (20) Tribunal decisions; (21) Tribunal’s power to recommend; (22) Information on patients' care; (23) Training in relation to patients with multiple or unusual conditions; (24) Facilities and experts for patient’s multiple or unusual conditions; (25) Future research. See [[Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council]]
| |
| | |
| ===Care Quality Commission===
| |
| *Care Quality Commission, 'Monitoring the Mental Health Act in 2010/11' (8/12/11). The detailed findings in this report are set out under the following chapter headings: (1) Patients' involvement and protection of their rights; (2) Consent to treatment; (3) Patients' experience of care and treatment; (4) Promoting patient safety; (5) Deaths of detained patients. See [[CQC]]
| |
| *Care Quality Commission, 'The operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in England 2009/10' (March 2011). The 'Issues Raised' are listed as: (1) the DH should consider developing clear, concise and practical briefings on what may constitute a 'deprivation of liberty' and when the Safeguards should be used; (2) staff should be trained effectively on the types of practice that may lead to deprivation of liberty, and should seek advice from their supervisory body in cases of doubt; (3) the move to regulation under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 will allow a monitoring role which is consistent across health and adult social care; (4) the DH should consider reducing the amount of paperwork required. See [[CQC]]
| |
| *Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, 'Monitoring places of detention: First annual report of the United Kingdom's National Preventive Mechanism: 1 April 2009 – 31 March 2010' (Cm 8010, February 2011). See [[CQC]]
| |
| *Community mental health services survey 2011 (results published August 2011). See [[Care Quality Commission]]
| |
| *Link added - 'National Archives: CQC website'. Some documents are not available on the current CQC website, but many of these can be located in these archives
| |
| | |
| ===Court of Protection===
| |
| *Judiciary of England and Wales, 'Court of Protection Report 2010' (July 2011). The report contains the following chapters: (1) Judiciary; (2) Court administration; (3) Work of the court; (4) Review of performance; (5) Case law; and (6) Volume of business. The case law chapter summarises 28 decisions made during the year. See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *Three Court of Protection Practice Directions were amended on 25/11/11: (1) Practice Direction 10AA (Deprivation of liberty applications) has been amended to reflect fact that the Court of Protection has moved. The DOLS Application Branch's new contact details are: Court of Protection, Royal Courts of Justice, Thomas More Building, Strand, London WC2A 2LL, DX 44450 Strand, tel 0300 456 4600. The PD also contains a new internet address for the relevant court forms. (2) Practice Direction 14B (Depositions) has similarly been updated to reflect the new address. (3) Practice Direction 19A (Costs in the Court of Protection) has been amended to replace 'Supreme Court Costs Office' with 'Senior Court Costs Office'. See [[Court of Protection Practice Directions]]
| |
| *Wolanski and Wilson, 'The Family Courts: Media Access & Reporting' (July 2011). This document (a joint publication of The President of the Family Division, the Judicial College and the Society of Editors) contains information on cases in the Court of Protection and under the High Court's inherent jurisdiction. See also Lucy Series, 'Access, reporting and judgments in the Court of Protection' (Small Places blog, 29/7/11). See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *Link added to Guardian newspaper's list of Court of Protection articles. Selected articles: Amelia Hill, 'Court of protection should be open to public scrutiny, says leading judge' (Guardian, 6/11/11); Amelia Hill, 'The court of protection: defender of the vulnerable or shadowy and unjust?' (Guardian, 6/11/11); Martin Terrell, 'Court of protection must balance needs of vulnerable with rights of family' (Guardian, 7/11/11). See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| | |
| ===Department of Health===
| |
| *Dept of Health, 'Section 67 of the Mental Health Act' (v3, 13/4/11). This document, setting out the procedure for requesting a reference under s67(1), has been updated with links to the MOJ website. See [[MHA 1983 s67]]
| |
| *Dept of Health, 'Ordinary residence: guidance on the identification of the ordinary residence of people in need of community care services, England' (15/4/11). 'The Ordinary Residence Guidance has been updated on 15/4/11, to provide revised guidance on people receiving NHS continuing health care immediately before 19/4/10, when certain changes to the legislation came into effect, and also on people from overseas.' (DH). See [[Ordinary residence]]
| |
| *Dept of Health, 'Pandemic Influenza and the Mental Health Act 1983: Response to Consultation on Proposed Changes to the Mental Health Act 1983 and its Associated Secondary Legislation' (29/7/11). The Government have concluded that all of the proposed temporary amendments (and further amendments to s5) would be an appropriate part of a package of contingency measures. The proposals requiring legislative changes are: (1) Allowing just one medical recommendation on an application by an AMHP for someone to be detained under sections 2 or 3 of the 1983 Act. (2) To facilitate C1 above, preparing special forms A2A and A6A for use by a doctor making a single medical recommendation. (3) Changing the number of doctors involved in decisions to transfer people from prison to hospital under Part 3 of the 1983 Act. (4) Suspending the obligation to obtain SOAD opinions on medication. (5). Suspending time limits... See [[Consultations#Department of Health]] for further details
| |
| *Dept of Health, 'Good Practice Procedure Guide: The transfer and remission of adult prisoners under s47 and s48 of the Mental Health Act' (1/4/11). See [[Transfer direction]]
| |
| *Dept of Health, 'Procedure for the Transfer from Custody of Children and Young People to and from Hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983 in England' (dated June 2011, published 1/8/11). See [[Transfer direction]]
| |
| *Dept of Health, 'Cross-border transfers of patients under the Mental Health Act' (gateway ref 14651, 2/9/10). Guidance and forms in relation to the transfer of patients to Scotland, Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. See [[New cross-border arrangements for leave and transfer]]
| |
| *Department of Health, 'Summary of two cases on the meaning of deprivation of liberty: the "MIG and MEG" case and the "A and C" case' (gateway ref 15723, 7/3/11). See [[DH]]
| |
| *DH, 'Response to the offender personality disorder consultation' (gateway ref 16313, 21/10/11). See [[Consultations#Department of Health]]
| |
| *Department of Health, 'Reporting the death of a person subject to an authorisation under the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards' (Gateway ref 15453, 19/1/11). See [[DOLS]]
| |
| *On 15/12/10 the Dept of Health published 'Liberating the NHS: Legislative framework and next steps' (Cm 7993, 2010). Para 2.53 states: 'Responsibility for commissioning independent mental health advocacy under the Mental Health Act will also move from PCTs to local authorities, together with the role of the supervisory body in respect of hospitals under the Mental Capacity Act deprivation of liberty safeguards. However, owing to its highly specialised nature, mental health advocacy will not be a part of the NHS complaints advocacy services that local authorities will be able to commission from HealthWatch.' See [[Independent Mental Health Advocate service]]
| |
| *Guidance on the completion of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards data collation sheet. The current version is 1.6 (16/12/10), superseding version 1.5 (28/6/10). See [[DOLS]]
| |
| *The DOLS standard forms were last updated in March 2011. See [[Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Standard Forms]]
| |
| *Department of Health, 'No health without mental health: a cross-Government mental health outcomes strategy for people of all ages'. The government announced this strategy, which alongside various supporting documents is available on the DH website, on 2/2/11. See [[DH]]
| |
| *Secretary of State for Health, 'Enabling Excellence: Autonomy and Accountability for Healthcare Workers, Social Workers and Social Care Workers' (Cm 8008, February 2011). This document introduces a Law Commission project into the regulation of healthcare workers in the UK and social workers and social care workers in England. See [[DH]]
| |
| *Dept of Health, 'Environmental Design Guide: adult medium secure services' (15/4/11). See [[DH]]
| |
| *Consultation on allocation options for funding for Local Healthwatch: PCT Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (27/7/11 to 18/10/11). 'Subject to the passage of the Health and Social Care Bill, the Department (DH) will allocate funding for local HealthWatch and, potentially, PCT Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards from October 2012. This new funding will be added to the current DH Learning Disabilities and Health Reform grant. This consultation is asking for your views on options for distributing the new funding for local HealthWatch and PCT Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS).' (quotation from DH website). See [[DH]]
| |
| *Dept of Health 'Consultation on preventing suicide in England: a cross-government outcomes strategy to save lives' runs from 19/7/11 to 11/10/11. See [[Consultations#Department of Health]]
| |
| | |
| ===Law Society===
| |
| *Updated Law Society practice note on representation before Mental Health Tribunals. This practice note, dated 19/5/11, advises on providing legal advice to clients appearing before the First Tier Tribunal (Mental Health) in England and the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales. It has information under the following headings: (1) Introduction; (2) The right to legal advice and representation before the tribunal; (3) Communication with the client; (4) Taking instructions; (5) Your duties towards your client; (6) Good tribunal practice; (7) Representing children and young people before the tribunal; (8) More information. The previous version of 13/8/09 was criticised in AA v Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (2009) UKUT 195 (AAC) - this version criticises that case. See [[Law Society practice note on representation before Mental Health Tribunals]]
| |
| *Law Society, 'Lasting powers of attorney: Practice note' (updated 8/12/11). 'The Law Society has produced a practice note to assist solicitors in advising clients wishing to draw up an LPA, as well as solicitors who are acting as an attorney under an LPA. The practice note also covers ongoing arrangements for Enduring Powers of Attorney.'
| |
| | |
| ===Legal Aid===
| |
| *Updated guidance. {{pagesummary|Peer review}}
| |
| *LSC, 'Community Legal Services: Keycard No 47' (April 2011). This document is helpful if working out financial eligibility for Legal Help. The changes in this edition are that: (1) references to LSC Manual 2F are changed to 2E; (2) dependents' allowances are increased. In force 11/4/11. See [[Legal Aid#Other resources]]
| |
| *Official Solicitor, 'Proposals for the reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales: Ministry of Justice consultation paper CP 12/10: Response of the Official Solicitor to the Senior Courts' (10/2/11). See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'Revised cost limitations on civil legal aid certificates' (12/12/11). These changes have been made as a result of the 10% fee reduction. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'New prior authority form to instruct civil legal aid experts' (CLS News, 9/11/11). New form APP8A introduced, together with guidance document. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *On 22/12/10 the LSC published revised Key Performance Indicators which are enforceable under the 2010 Civil Contract. The three KPI aims are (1) quality, (2) access, and (3) cost. The following KPIs apply to mental health: KPI 2A: 'Assessment reductions to be no more than 10% (exceptional cases)', KPI 2B: 'Assessment reductions to be no more than 15% (licensed work)', KPI 2D: 'Fixed Fee Margin 20%', KPI 3: 'NMS usage - providers must use either the minimum contract allocation or at least 85% of their current allocation' (whichever is the greater). The following KPIs do not apply to mental health: KPI 1A: 'Substantive Benefit: Legal Help', KPI 1B: 'Substantive Benefit: CLR and Licensed Work', KPI 1C: 'Post-investigation of proceedings', KPI 1D: 'ADR to be proposed/accepted in no less than 10% of a providers civil representation cases where appropriate', KPI 2C: 'Damages vs. Costs: Damages to be 2:1 the level of costs (net of any costs recovered)'. See the CLS news item, the guidance document and the summary chart. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *Ministry of Justice, 'Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales: the Government Response' (Cm 8072, June 2011). Some points particularly relevant to mental health law are: (1) There will be a 10% cut in all civil fees, including mental health law (para 34). (2) Advice and representation under the MHA 1983 or MCA 2005 will remain in scope (para 86). However claims involving tort or other general damages claims will be excluded except where these meet the criteria for 'claims against public authorities' or 'claims arising out of allegations of the abuse of a child or vulnerable adult, or allegations of sexual assault' (para 87). The 'claims against public authorities' criteria allow legal advice and representation for claims (typically claims for damages) against public authorities concerning 'abuse of position or power' or 'significant breach of human rights' (no longer for 'serious wrong-doing') (para 10ff). (3) Legal aid will remain available for judicial review and habeas corpus (subject to immaterial exceptions) (para 88ff). See [[Consultations#Ministry of Justice]]
| |
| *CLS News, 'Legal aid reform: consultation response and Bill published' (21/6/11). This news item contains links to the consultation response and Bill, and notes that the Bill, in addition to reducing scope, eligibility and fees, will close the LSC and replace it with an executive agency of the MOJ. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'Summary of changes to be implemented on 3 Oct 2011' (21/6/11). The 10% reduction, and other fee changes, will be implemented on 3/10/11. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *Between May 2010 and May 2011, the LSC spent £7,196,813 on redundancies: a total of 94 people have so far been made redundant. The figures do not include those who left through other means, such as early retirement, the end of a secondment from another organisation, mutual terminations or compromise agreements. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *On 28/3/11, the LSC emailed mental health firms with a questionnaire to comply with the judgment in [[Public Interest Lawyers v LSC (2010) EWHC 3277 (Admin)]]. The questions are worded in the hope of avoiding having to make any changes; nonetheless, responses are encouraged and should be emailed to the LSC by 8/4/11. The LSC will then publish a disability impact assessment by 30/4/11. At the same time it will publish the mitigating steps it plans to make (if any), consult on them until 15/6/11, and implement them on 1/7/11. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *Law Society, 'Society criticises mental health consultation delays' (press release, 23/3/11). Because of the LSC's plan to dilly-dally over the disability impact assessment and consultation on contract changes following Public Interest Lawyers v LSC (2010) EWHC 3277 (Admin), 'clients will be forced into the very situation that the impact assessment is meant to be considering and potentially preventing'; if the provisions for urgent amendments were used then changes could be implemented by early April instead of the end of June as planned. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *On 20/2/11 the LSC published an updated tender outcome document for the SHA procurement areas. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *House of Commons Justice Committee, 'Government's proposed reform of legal aid' (Third Report of Session 2010–11, Volume I, dated 29/3/11, published 30/3/11). This document, among other things, contains interesting information about volume of work and expenditure on mental health Legal Aid over the last six years (Tables 1 and 4, and para 21). See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'Bank statements needed for funding applications' (CLS News, 3/2/11). All MEANS1 forms dated on or after 15/12/10 must be accompanied by bank statements covering the last three months for each account held by the client or his partner. From 14/3/11 the LSC will reject all non-emergency applications in breach of this requirement. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *The LSC's 'Where work is processed' document was updated in February 2011. See [[Legal Aid#Where work is processed]]
| |
| *LSC, 'Community Legal Advice and LSC websites – latest news' (CLS News, 23/3/11). The CLA (Community Legal Advice) and LSRC (Legal Services Research Centre, the independent research division of the LSC) websites will be closed and their content moved to the justice.gov.uk and direct.gov.uk websites on 6/4/11. The LSC website will be incorporated into the justice.gov.uk website later in 2011. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'Forms preview May 2011' (8/4/11). The following will change: CLASAPP3, CLSPP5, CLSCLAIM1, CLSCLAIM1A, CLSCLAIM1A Guidance, CLSCLAIM2, CLSCLAIM5A, CLSCLAIM5A Guidance, CW1 Public Law. They are mandatory from 9/5/11 and must not be used before then. Old forms (signed before 9/5/11) will be accepted until 3/6/11. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *The reduced hourly rates and fixed fees are scheduled to be introduced on 3/10/11. See [[Legal Aid#Hourly rates]] and [[Legal Aid#Fixed fees]] for details
| |
| *Legal Services Commission, 'Devolved powers in judicial review cases under the 2010 contract' (dated 31/7/11, published 27/7/11). The interim position has been extended to 31/1/12: devolved powers in JR cases may be exercised if a provider (a) has a contract in public law or the relevant category of law and (b) had such devolved powers under the previous contract. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'CLS News: Emergency certificates now run for eight weeks – but check eligibility evidence and scope' (21/7/11). Emergency certificates granted from 1/5/11 will remain in force for eight weeks. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'CLS News: Mental health legal services: your views on equality impact assessment' (21/7/11). This is a reminder that the deadline for submitting views on the options for next steps following the equality impact assessment on the high secure hospital contracts is 29/7/11. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC, 'CLS News: Mental health legal services: equality impact assessment published' (4/7/11), relating to LSC, 'Equality Impact Assessment of exclusive mental health legal services contracts in High Security Hospitals' (4/7/11). The LSC have concluded that there is no need for immediate change but have set out possible options for the future: (1) no change (the recommended option); (2) Exceptional circumstances to allow clients to retain their provider; (3) Individual arrangements at each hospital; (4) Wider choice of provider (e.g. 10) at each hospital through additional tender or extending number of 2010 contracts; (5) Wider choice of provider (e.g. 10) at each hospital through additional tender or extending number of 2010 contracts. Views on the decision and options are sought by 29/7/11. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *LSC's refusal, in response to FOI request, to publish peer review decisions (5/7/11). See [[Peer review]]
| |
| *On 24/2/11 the LSC published a 'forms preview' for the April 2011 changes to their forms. There are very minor changes to Checklist (CK3), and changes to the following forms which do not relate to mental health law: CW2 (IMM), CW3A, CW3B, CW3C. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| *From 3/10/11 the following Legal Aid forms change (not all are directly related to mental health law): Means1; Means1 'The guide' and CLSCK3; Means7; CLAIM1, 1A, 2, 5, 5A; CLAIM1 & CLAIM2 checklists; CW1; ECClaim 1 (IMM) and (MH); TFF. See [[Legal Aid News]]
| |
| | |
| ===Mental Health Tribunal===
| |
| *The Tribunal Procedure Committee is consulting on changes to the rules so that the Tribunal may (1) make a decision on a reference under s68 (duty of managers to refer cases to tribunal) without a hearing if the patient is a community patient and has consented to this; and (2) strike out a party's case without a hearing. The purpose is to save money. The rationale given for the first proposal is that community patients are often content with their position and do not want to attend the hearing or medical examination; that if the patient does not attend then full reports often mean there is little point having a hearing; and that hearings place an unnecessary burden on community patients, who are likely to be quite capable of making the necessary decisions and are entitled to IMHAs and Legal Aid. It is anticipated that all community patients would be posted a form inviting them to consent to their case being decided without a hearing. In relation to the second proposal, it is intended that the power would be used when it is obvious that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction. Consultation runs from 1/6/11 to 23/8/11. See [[Consultations#Mental Health Tribunal]]
| |
| *Public Mental Health Tribunal hearing. HMCTS, 'Judicial direction: An application by Mr Albert Haines' (9/8/11, published 18/8/11). The text is as follows: An application by Mr Albert Haines for discharge from liability to detention in hospital will be heard in public by the First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health) on 27th and 28th September 2011 at 10.30am at Field House 15 - 25 Breams Buildings, London EC4A 1DZ. See [[Mental Health Tribunal]]
| |
| *The First-tier Tribunal decision in Albert Haines's case has been published, together with the directions in relation to the publication of that decision. See [[AH v West London MH NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 74 (AAC)#Tribunal documents]]
| |
| *HMCTS, 'First-tier Tribunal Mental Health Stakeholder Bulletin July 2011' (29/7/11). The following are the headings: (1) Contacting the Tribunal; (2) Use of Secure Email; (3) Applications; (4) Forms used in the Applications Process; (5) Case Management Requests (form CMR1); (5) Secretary of State Supplementary Statements; (6) Reports Processing Team; (7) Decisions; (8) Feedback. See [[Mental Health Tribunal]]
| |
| *Jonathan Gammon, 'Criminal Justice Secure Email (CJSM)' (letter to solicitors, 31/1/11). This letter provides details of the CJSM system and encourages solicitors to sign up for a free account. See [[Mental Health Tribunal#External links]]
| |
| *On 2/3/11 the Legal Services Commission issued a statement entitled 'Tribunals Service asks mental health providers to use secure email service'. See [[Mental Health Tribunal#External links]]
| |
| *The Law Society have published a statement encouraging solicitors to use the CJSM secure email system. See [[Mental Health Tribunal]]
| |
| *Tribunals Service customer notice: 'The First–tier Tribunal (Mental Health) office will be closed for Easter on Friday 22nd April and Monday 25th April. In addition the office will be closed on 29th April on the occasion of the Royal Wedding.' See [[MHT]]
| |
| *On 1/4/11 the Tribunals Service and Her Majesty's Courts Service merged to form Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service. The 'mhrt.org.uk' website is no longer operational, and the content has been transferred to the MOJ website. See [[Mental Health Tribunal#External links]]
| |
| | |
| ===Ministry of Justice===
| |
| *Ministry of Justice, 'Office of the Public Guardian - fees 2011/2012: Consultation paper' (CP 16/10, 28/2/11). The consultation runs to 21/5/11. The stated aim is 'to ensure that the OPG fee policy remains fair, equitable and proportionate to the services being provided whilst at the same time reflecting the current economic climate'. The fee changes are summarised on the OPG website. See [[Consultations#Ministry of Justice]]
| |
| *Ministry of Justice, 'Court Of Protection: Authorised Officers: A consultation on the delegation of some decisions in the Court of Protection to court officers' (consultation paper CP9/2011, June 2011). Consultation runs from 28/6/11 to 20/9/11. See [[Consultations#Ministry of Justice]]
| |
| *Ministry of Justice consultation: Fees in the High Court and Court of Appeal (15/11/11 to 7/2/12). 'A consultation proposing changes to fees in the High Court and Court of Appeal Division. It is aimed at users of the High Court and Court of Appeal Civil Division, the legal profession, the judiciary, the advice sector and all with an interest in this area in England and Wales. The aim of these proposals is to charge users of these two jurisdictions more proportionally for the resource their cases consume, while protecting access to justice for the most vulnerable. This will reduce the taxpayer subsidy of the courts service.' (introductory text)
| |
| *Ministry of Justice National Offender Management Service and Department of Health, 'Working with personality disordered offenders: A practitioners guide' (January 2011). See [[Ministry of Justice#External links]]
| |
| *The MoJ website has a new 'mentally disordered offenders' area, including a new contact list for the MH Casework Section. See [[Ministry of Justice]]
| |
| *MoJ discussion paper on a proposed European Regulation on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters (consultation ended on 8/7/11). See [[Consultations#Ministry of Justice]]
| |
| *Ministry of Justice, 'Appointments and Diversity: A Public Consultation' (Consultation paper CP19/2011, 21/11/11). Of relevance to mental health law are the following proposals: (1) Amending s63 Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which currently requires judicial appointment to be 'solely on merit', to allow the Equality Act 2010's protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, gender and sexual orientation) to be taken into account: where a 'selection assessment on a range of criteria rates them as equally capable of doing the job' then the presumption will be that protected characteristics will tip the balance in favour of those possessing them. (2) To provide more opportunity for appointments based on diversity, changing the tenure of fee-paid appointments so that they no longer last until retirement, but instead for a maximum of three five-year terms save in exceptional cases where there is a clear business need. Consultation runs from 21/11/11 to 13/2/12. See [[Consultations]]
| |
| | |
| ===Newsletters===
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 16, December 2011). The cases mentioned in this issue are: Re RK; RK v BCC [2011] EWCA Civ 1305, Cheshire West and Chester Council v P [2011] EWCA Civ 1333, Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 4) [2011] EWHC 3017 (Fam), Re FL; HN v FL and Hampshire CC [2011] EWHC 2894 (COP), R v Heaney [2011] EWCA Crim 2682, Re HM; SM v HM (2011) COP 11875043 4/11/11, De Louville De Toucy v Bonhams 1793 Ltd [2011] All ER (D) 32 (Nov). Also included are: (1) the Court of Protection (Amendment) Rules 2011 (authorised court officers); (2) minor amendments to Practice Directions 10A, 14B and 19A (contact details); (3) Statistics on permission applications; (4) comment on the Cheshire judgment by a BIA. See [[39 Essex Street COP Newsletter]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 15, November 2011). The case mentioned in this special issue is Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1257. See [[39 Essex Street COP Newsletter]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 14, October-November 2011). The cases referred to are: Re S; D v R (the deputy of S) [2010] EWHC 3748 (COP), Sharma v Hunters [2011] EWHC 2546 (COP), Re GM; FP v GM and A Health Board [2011] EWHC 2778 (COP), LG v DK [2011] EWHC 2453 (COP), A Local Authority v DL [2010] EWHC 2675 (Fam), R (Sessay) v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust [2011] EWHC 2617 (QB), DN v Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust [2011] UKUT 327 (AAC). Also mentioned is the Law Commission report on kidnapping, which includes a discussion of Re HM; PM v KH [2010] EWHC 870 (Fam). See [[39 Essex Street COP Newsletter]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 12, August 2011). The cases referred to are: Manchester City Council v G [2011] EWCA Civ 939, P v Independent Print Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 756, and WCC v GS [2011] EWHC 2244 (COP). It also mentions several forthcoming cases: (1) W v M (minimally conscious state); (2) Cheshire v P (application of Article 5(1) to those in care homes who are subject to restraint for their own protection: to be heard by Court of Appeal); (3) Re RK (application of Article 5(1) ECHR to those between 16 and 18: being appealed to Court of Appeal); (4) MIG and MEG (Article 5: possibly to be considered by Supreme Court); (5) Re P (circumstances under which bodily samples including DNA may be taken from P for purposes of determining the parentage of any person); (6) Re P (circumstances in which, and the powers under which, hospitals may detain those without the relevant capacity pending the making of applications for their admission under the Mental Health Act 1983). See [[39 Essex Street COP Newsletter]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 11, July 2011). The cases referred to are: Re PH; PH v A Local Authority (2011) EWHC 1704 (Fam), R (McDonald) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (2011) UKSC 33. It also contains information under the following headings: (1) Deprivation of Liberty: Statistics and a Map; (2) Appointment of QB judges to hear CoP cases in an emergency; and (3) Court of Protection User Survey. See [[39 Essex Street COP Newsletter]]
| |
| *Letter from COP Court Manager (July 2011) and associated COP Questionnaire (July 2011). See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 9, May 2011). The cases referred to are: R v Dunn [2010] EWCA Crim 2935, Hackett v CPS [2011] EWHC 1170 (Admin), Re M; W v M [2011] EWHC 1197 (COP), Wychavon District Council v EM (HB) [2011] UKUT 144 (AAC). Reference is also made to the President's direction that 'Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding cases in the Court of Protection should continue for the time being and until further notice to be heard in the High Court'. See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 8, April 2011). The cases referred to are: [[LBB v JM (2010) COP 5/2/10]] and [[A Local Authority v DL (2011) EWHC 1022 (Fam)]] (transcripts to follow). Also reproduced is a draft [[COP Practice Direction: Preparation of Bundles]]. See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 7, March 2011). See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter (issue 6, February 2011) added. The cases referred to are: [[Re AB; D Borough Council v AB (2011) EWHC 101 (COP)]], [[Hill v Fellowes Solicitors LLP (2011) EWHC 61 (QB)]], [[Haworth v Cartmel and HMRC (2011) EWHC 36 (Ch)]], [[GSCC conduct committee decision: Philip Julian Davies 10/12/10]]. See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *39 Essex Street, 'Court of Protection Newsletter' (issue 5, January 2011). See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| *Mind, 'Legal E-newsletter' (issue 10, November 2011). The edition contains the following articles and case reports: (1) Section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Health and Social Care Bill 2011; (2) Reasonable adjustments – how the law is developing; (3) Enhanced Criminal Record Checks (ECRC): Disclosure of Mental Health History; (4) Accommodation provided by social services under s21 of the National Assistance Act 1948; (5) Legal representation in mental health cases (feature by Richard Charlton, MHLA chairman); (6) AH v West London MH NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 74 (AAC) (public hearing); (7) DN v Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust (2011) UKUT 327 (AAC) (MHA/MCA interface); (8) CX v A Local Authority (2011) EWHC 1918 (Admin) (NR consultation); (9) Jackson v Liverpool City Council (2011) EWCA Civ 1068 (employer references); (10) Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Trust (2010) EWCA Civ 698 (Article 2: recently heard by the Supreme Court). See [[Mind (Charity)]]
| |
| *Mind, 'Legal E-newsletter' (issue 9, July 2011). The newsletter contains the following articles and news items: (1) Time for change – true non-discrimination in mental health law; (2) The Law Commission Proposals for Adult Social Care Law; (3) Independent Mental Health Advocates; (4) Supervised Community Treatment Orders; (5) Case reports on Re Steven Neary; LB Hillingdon v Steven Neary (2011) EWHC 1377 (COP) and McKie v Swindon College (2011) EWHC 469 (QB); (5) MHA 1983 s64C; (6) Ministry of Justice Court of Protection Consultation; (7) Adult Social Care Funding: Dilnot Commission Report; (8) Ministry of Justice: Draft Charter for the Current Coroner Service; (9) McKenzie Friends Practice Guidance (Civil and Family Courts); (10) Law Society practice note on representation before Mental Health Tribunals; (11) Legal Aid Update; (12) Local Government Ombudsman update; (13) Tribunal Procedure Rules Consultation; and (14) Equality Act Update. See [[Mind (Charity)]]
| |
| *Mind, 'Legal enewsletter' (Issue 8, March 2011). The newsletter covers the following subjects: (1) Patients' experiences of the First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health); (2) Legal Aid cuts - Mind's response; (3) Equality Act 2010 - answering an employer's question about health; (4) Media Publicity and the Court of Protection; (5) Mental capacity and debt; and (6) Public Equality Duty. See [[Mind (Charity)]]
| |
| *Sally Bradley, 'Court of Protection Update (January 2011)' (Family Law Week, 7/1/11). See [[Court of Protection]]
| |
| | |
| ===Office of the Public Guardian===
| |
| *Hansard HL, 18 October 2011, col WS14. Since the implementation of the MCA 2005, the Office of the Public Guardian carried out insolvency checks on potential LPA donees; to save money, this practice has ceased. See [[Lasting Power of Attorney]]
| |
| *The Office of the Public Guardian has published revised forms for applying to register an enduring or lasting power of attorney to reflect recent fee changes and website updates. The LPA guidance has also been amended to clarify who can act as a certificate provider. (Source: Law Society update email 6/10/11). See [[LPA]]
| |
| *Office of the Public Guardian, 'Call for evidence: Not for profit delivery of deputyship services' (4/8/11). Consultation runs from 4/8/11 to 27/10/11. The consultation document cites the 'Big Society' concept. The introduction states that 'Not for profit delivery of deputyship services has three purposes: (1) to understand the reasons behind the low take up amongst not-for-profit organisations of deputyship work; (2) to benchmark the costs of providing deputyship services within the sector; (3) to test interest in such organisations providing personal welfare deputyships in the future.' The questions show that the hope is to get the same service for approximately half the price a solicitor deputy. See [[Consultations#Ministry of Justice]]
| |
| *OPG's MCA Update emails of 28/2/11 and 3/3/11: both relate to a consultation on fee changes which runs until 21/5/11, the changes to take effect from 1/7/11. See [[MCA Update emails]]
| |
| *Text of 'MCA Update' 21/4/11 email added. This email sets out the detail of the fees consultation and a reminder that the consultation will close on 21/5/11. See [[MCA Update emails]]
| |
| *The OPG website will close on 4/4/11; its content will be moved to the MOJ and 'Direct Gov' websites. See [[MCA Update emails]]
| |
| *Text of MCA Update 1/7/11 email added. The 51 responses to the OPG fees consultation are being considered. See [[MCA Update emails]]
| |
| *Text of MCA Update email of 7/9/11 added. This relates to the new OPG fees. See [[MCA Update emails]]
| |
| | |
| ===Press/articles===
| |
| *Adam James, 'Landmark Broadmoor patient loses appeal to be released from detention' (Psychminded, 18/10/11). See [[AH v West London MH NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 74 (AAC)]]
| |
| *Ajit Shah et al, 'Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in England: implementation costs' (2011) 199 BJP 232 (subscription only). 'Results: The estimated average cost of a single DoLS assessment was £1277. Conclusions: The estimated average cost of a single DoLS assessment was significantly higher than the £600 estimated by the government. However, the allocated budget, based on 20 000 estimated DoLS assessments in the first year of its implementation, is likely to be adequate because a significantly lower number of assessments (only 5200) were conducted in the first 9 months after its implementation.' Related press article: Mithran Samuels, 'Deprivation of liberty safeguard cases cost double government's estimates' (Community Care, 30/9/11). See [[DOLS#External links]]
| |
| *Amelia Hill, 'Court of Protection case to be reported in real time after landmark legal ruling' (Guardian, 8/8/11). Deprivation of liberty case. See [[Settled cases and forthcoming judgments]]
| |
| *BBC Radio 4: The Report: Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. This programme, broadcast at 2000hrs on Thursday 24/11/11, discusses whether the DOLS are adequate, whether they are understood by care workers, and why they are so unevenly applied across the country. See [[DOLS#Other links]]
| |
| *BBC, 'Care workers use glove puppet to bully elderly women', 6/1/11. This article involves a prosecution under MCA 2005 s44. See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *BBC, 'TB treatment man Gary Clayden at Blackpool hospital' (19/7/11). In this case a s45G order was made but not used because the infected person attended hospital voluntarily
| |
| *Daily Mail, 'Judge gives go-ahead for medics to sedate and restrain woman with hospital phobia who needs cancer treatment' (8/7/11). 'A High Court judge has given medics permission to sedate and restrain a mentally-ill woman who has a phobia about hospitals but needs treatment for bladder cancer.' (quotation from article). See [[Settled cases and forthcoming judgments]]
| |
| *Daily Mail, 'Mother withdraws bid to sterilise 21-year-old daughter with significant learning difficulties' (21/4/11); Jerome Taylor, 'Court to rule on sterilisation of pregnant woman' (Independent, 14/2/11); Tim Ross, 'Woman with learning difficulties could be forcibly sterilised' (Telegraph 14/2/11). These articles relate to an application by a mother for the sterilisation of her daughter during a caesarian section operation: according to the articles, at a preliminary hearing in February 2011 the case was adjourned for expert evidence, but by April 2011 the daughter had given birth and the mother had withdrawn her application. See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *Daily Telegraph, 'Serial killers entitled to benefits, minister admits' (19/7/11). This tabloid-style article complains about the ability of hospital order patients to receive welfare benefits. See [[Welfare benefits]]
| |
| *Guardian, 'Smokers win right to challenge hospital ban' (6/5/11). Silber J gave permission to seek judicial review of Chadwick Lodge's policy of prohibiting smoking on hospital grounds (indoors or outdoors) or on escorted community leave. See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *Jaspreet Phull, 'The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards: observations and limitations' (2011) 51 Med Sci Law 187 (subscription only). Abstract: 'The recently introduced Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which came into force in April 2009, was created to protect the liberty of people lacking capacity admitted to care homes and hospitals in England and Wales. This paper discusses observations and some limitations of the DoLS for protecting the liberty of residents within institutional settings. The regulation, safeguards and recent relevant case law are examined critically. The author suggests that their effectiveness may be limited by the under-recognition of cases, ambiguity and limited safeguards within the statute. The paper concludes that the DoLS legislation has been a positive step towards protecting the liberty of those lacking capacity but that limitations present could undermine the purpose of the legislation.' See [[DOLS]]
| |
| *Jerome Taylor, 'High Court to decide if autistic man was illegally detained' (Independent, 28/5/11). Peter Jackson J has reserved judgment on the unlawful detention aspect of this case. See [[Re Steven Neary; LB Hillingdon v Steven Neary (2011) EWHC 413 (COP)]]
| |
| *Jerome Taylor, 'Judge scrutinises ill man's removal from foster home' (Independent, 21/10/11). See [[Settled cases and forthcoming judgments#Re GR (deprivation of liberty, Hedley J)]]
| |
| *John Leighton, 'Deprivation of liberty safeguards guide for care homes' (Community Care, 7/11/11) and Mithran Samuel, 'Helping care home managers navigate the deprivation of liberty process' (Community Care, 10/11/11). See [[DOLS#Other links]]
| |
| *Julian Hendy, 'Scandal of mentally ill man who killed his father, was then released...and killed his mother' (Mail on Sunday, 10/4/11). This article is critical of mental health services, including mental health tribunals (for being in private), internal homicide inquiries (for being unreliable) and independent inquiries (for being repeatedly ignored). See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *Kirsten Sjvoll, 'Case Preview: Rabone & Anor v Pennine Care NHS Trust' (UKSC Blog, 10/11/11). See [[Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Trust (2010) EWCA Civ 698]]
| |
| *Leicester Mercury, 'Woman who abused patients has jail term cut' (5/11/11). See [[MCA 2005 s44]]
| |
| *Links to articles added. (1) Tim Ross, 'Dementia doctors may face jail for using chemical cosh' (Daily Telegraph, 2/11/11). (2) Pulse, 'Minister warns GPs could require PCT permission to prescribe antipsychotics - or face jail' (3/11/11). Health Minister Paul Burstow claims that 'Antipsychotic drugs prescribed against the evidence, without clear clinical justification, amount to a deprivation of liberty'. (3) Mithran Samuel, 'Burstow bid to use Dols to curb antipsychotics use "draconian"' (Community Care, 10/10/11). See [[DOLS#'Chemical cosh']]
| |
| *Links to various articles about Albert Haines's public Mental Health Tribunal hearing added. See [[AH v West London MH NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 74 (AAC)]]
| |
| *Mark Gould, 'Mental health patients complain of "zombification"' (Guardian, 15/3/11). This article discusses the increasing use of detention and CTOs. See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *Martin Beckford, 'Man kept in hospital for three months over infection fears' (Telegraph, 24/10/11). See [[Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984]]
| |
| *Martin Beckford, 'Mother seeks to let daughter with brain damage die' (Daily Telegraph, 15/4/11). This article relates to a preliminary Court of Protection hearing on 14/4/11 before Baker J, involving a patient M who is in a minimally conscious state (rather than a persistent vegetative state): M's mother wants artificial nutrition and hydration to be removed, whereas the Official Solicitor argues that it is M's best interests to be kept alive. See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *Martin Beckford, 'Secrecy fears after court bans contact with 65 people' (Telegraph, 19/4/11). Hedley J permitted the press to attend hearings in this case (see previous article); this article complains about the press being ordered not to communicate with witnesses or healthcare professionals (except via the applicant's solicitor) and not to enter within 50 metres of their addresses. See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *Peter Bartlett, '"The necessity must be convincingly shown to exist": standards for compulsory treatment for mental disorder under the Mental Health Act 1983' [2011] Med L Rev 1. See [[Compulsory treatment]]
| |
| *Philip Hoult, 'Local authority wins appeal in landmark ruling on deprivations of liberty' (Local Government Lawyer, 10/11/11); O'Donnells Solicitors, 'Article 5 – The Court of Appeal Has Another Go!' (10/11/11). See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1257]]
| |
| *Press articles about ''Re M'', an application to Court of Protection for cessation of artificial nutrition and hydration of patient in minimally conscious state (as opposed to persistent vegetative state). Daily Telegraph, 'High Court judge gives brain-damaged sister right to die' (20/7/11) (inaccurate headline); Andy McSmith, 'Man pleads with court for right to end his partner's life' (Independent, 20/7/11). See [[Settled cases and forthcoming judgments]]
| |
| *Press articles added for various unreported COP judgments: Re SJ (Deprivation of liberty, Ryder J); Re M (Minimally-conscious state, Baker J); Re P (Cancer treatment, Baron J); Re P (Persistent vegetative state, Charles J); Re L (Palliative care, Peter Jackson J). See [[Settled cases and forthcoming judgments]]
| |
| *Private Eye, 'Mental Health: Catch 22' (Eye 1277, 10-23 December 2010). This article refers to the situation where Article 5 prevented patients from being discharged from hospital to conditions which amounted to a deprivation of liberty (which is no longer the case following [[SSJ v RB (2010) UKUT 454 (AAC)]]). See [[Mental health law in the media]]
| |
| *RCPsych, 'Being sectioned (in England and Wales)' (November 2011). See [[Royal College of Psychiatrists]]
| |
| *Ruth Cairns et al, 'Judgements about deprivation of liberty made by various professionals: comparison study' (2011) 35 Psychiatrist 344 (subscription only). 'Aims and method: A group of lawyers, psychiatrists, best interest assessors and independent mental capacity advocates were asked to make binary judgements about whether real-life situations in 12 vignettes amounted to deprivation of liberty. Kappa coefficients were calculated to describe the level of agreement within each professional group and for the total group of professionals. Results: There was total agreement between all professionals about deprivation of liberty in only 1 of the 12 cases. The overall level of agreement for judgements made by all professionals was ‘slight’ (κ=0.16, P<0.01). Clinical implications: There are practical difficulties involved in making reliable deprivation of liberty judgements within the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) legislation. A clear interpretation of deprivation of liberty is necessary to facilitate professionals’ decision-making in this area.' Related press article: Laura Donnelly, 'Dementia patients let down despite promises' (Telegraph, 1/10/11). See [[DOLS#External links]]
| |
| *Ruth Cairns et al, 'Mired in confusion: making sense of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards' (2011) 51 Med Sci Law 228 (subscription only). Extract from abstract: '''Participants and setting'' Six eminent barristers and solicitors with expertise in mental health law attended a consensus meeting after making individual judgements about vignettes describing the situations of 28 incapacitated patients who had been admitted informally to a range of psychiatric inpatient units in South East London. ''Results'' Lawyers attributed key importance to a patient's ‘freedom to leave’ and suggested that patients' subjective experiences should be considered when identifying deprivation of liberty. ''Conclusions'' Clarification of deprivation of liberty and its safeguards will develop with future case law. Based on current available case law, the lawyers' expert views represented a divergence from Code of Practice guidance. We suggest that clinicians give consideration to this.' See [[DOLS]]
| |
| *Stephen Lewis, 'Autistic teenager Liam Brunskill in adult care wrangle' (York Press, 10/8/11) and Stephen Lewis, 'Liam Brunskill’s family ready to move to fund court hearing' (York Press, 17/8/11). Residence dispute due to be heard in Court of Protection. See [[Settled cases and forthcoming judgments]]
| |
| *The Small Places Blog, 'Mental Capacity Act and Tenancy: An open question' (7/10/11). This article, which appeared originally on the Nearly Legal housing law blog, argues that ''Wychavon'' was wrongly decided because 'a contract with someone lacking capacity to enter such a contract is voidable (not void) by the person lacking capacity if the other party was aware of their lack of capacity'. See {{pagesummary|Wychavon District Council v EM (HB) (2011) UKUT 144 (AAC)}}
| |
| *UKPA, 'Brain-damage woman ruling challenge' (26/10/11). Applicant seeks leave to appeal to Court of Appeal. See [[Re M; W v M (2011) EWHC 2443 (COP)]]
| |
| | |
| ===Statistics===
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Inpatients formally detained in hospitals under the Mental Health Act 1983 and patients subject to supervised community treatment, Annual figures, England 2010/11' (11/10/11). Extract from summary: 'The latest figures for 2010/11 suggest that the number of people subject to restrictions under the Mental Health Act continues to rise. Whilst the number of formal admissions for treatment and new Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) has decreased since the previous reporting period, the overall number of people remaining in detention or subject to a CTO is higher than before. The number of uses of Place of Safety Orders has also increased. The figures also show major changes in the number of formal detentions, uses of Place of Safety Orders and CTOs.'
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Assessments (England) - Second report on annual data, 2010/11' (20/7/11). The key facts (abbreviated) are: (1) The total number of applications made was still much lower than expected for the second year; (2) The number of successful applications resulting in an authorisation to deprive a person of their liberty was about the expected number, though a much higher percentage of applications than expected were successful; (3) About 2 per cent of applications that were not authorised involved situations where the person was nevertheless judged as being in a situation that amounted to a deprivation of liberty; (4) Of those authorisations that were granted, more then half (55 per cent) were for a person who lacked capacity because of dementia; (5) 57 per cent of those applications made to a Local Authority were granted when applying for a deprivation of liberty compared to 50 per cent in Primary Care Trusts. See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Mental Health Bulletin - Fifth report from Mental Health Minimum Dataset (MHMDS) annual returns, 2011' (29/11/11). See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Mental Health Bulletin - Fourth report from Mental Health Minimum Dataset (MHMDS) annual returns, 2010' (11/1/11). Two of the key facts are that (1) 'The number of people who spent time in a mental health hospital rose by 5.1 per cent - the first increase in five years'; and (2) 'This rise was due to a 30.1 per cent rise in the number of people being compulsorily detained in hospital under the Mental Health Act, from 32,649 in 2008/9 to 42,479 in 2009/10. Some part of this increase was due to improved recording between 2008/09 and 2009/10, because a small number of trusts failed to provide MHA information in 2008/09. On a like for like basis, excluding the data for trusts that failed to return information in 2008/09, there was an estimated increase of about 17.5 per cent in the number of people being detained under the MHA - from 32,649 to 38,369.' See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Quarterly analysis of Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Assessments (England) Quarter 2 2010/11', 22/12/10. The summary states that these statistics provide the first official information about authorisations using the legislation. Key facts listed are: (1) the number of authorisations completed was 2,333 in quarter 2; (2) of the total assessments completed in this quarter, a higher proportion were for females than for males; (3) in quarter 2, 76 per cent of assessments were made by local authorities while the rest were made by primary care trusts; (4) the percentage of authorisations granted which led to someone being deprived of their liberty was 54 per cent in quarter 2; (5) at 30 September 2010 1,436 people were subject to such authorisations. See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Quarterly analysis of Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Assessments (England) Quarter 3 2010/11' (30/3/11). The publication strategy is for biennial reports in 2011/12 and an annual report in 2012/13. The key facts listed are: (1) The number of authorisations completed was 2,267 in quarter 3; (2) Of the total assessments completed in this quarter, a higher proportion were for females than for males; (3) In quarter 3, 74 per cent of assessments were made by local authorities while the rest were made by primary care trusts; (4) The percentage of authorisations granted which led to someone being deprived of their liberty was 54 per cent in quarter 3; (5) At 31 December 2010 1,450 people were subject to such authorisations. See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Quarterly analysis of Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) Assessments (England)' (22/6/11). The 'key facts' listed are: (1) The number of authorisations completed was 2,308 in quarter 4; (2) Of the total assessments completed in this quarter, a higher proportion were for females than for males; (3) In quarter 4, 74 per cent of assessments were made by local authorities while the rest were made by primary care trusts; (4) The percentage of authorisations granted which led to someone being deprived of their liberty was 58 per cent in quarter 4; (5) At 31 March 2011 1,512 people were subject to such authorisations. See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *NHS Information Centre, 'Social Care and Mental Health Indicators from the National Indicator Set - 2009-10 Final release' (various documents, 20/4/11). See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *NHSIC, 'Bi-annual analysis of Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Assessments (England): April-September 2011' (2/12/11). The key facts are stated as follows: 'The figures show that between 1 April and 30 September 2011: (1) 5,472 authorisation requests were completed. 3,963 (72.4 per cent) were received by LAs and 1,509 (27.6 per cent) were received by PCTs. (2) 3,079 (56.3 per cent) of the completed assessments resulted in an authorisation. (3) Of the total assessments completed, a slightly higher proportion was for females 2,857 (52.2 per cent) than males 2,615 (47.8 per cent). (4) At the end of the reporting period, 30 September 2011, 1,697 people were subject to a current standard authorisation. 1,484 (87.4 per cent) followed a granted LA authorisation and 213 (12.6 per cent) followed a granted PCT authorisation.'
| |
| *NHSIC, 'Guardianship under the Mental Health Act 1983 - England 2011' (8/9/11). Key facts: (1) The number of new Guardianship cases fell by 22 per cent between 2009/10 and 2010/11 from 435 to 339 cases, which is the largest reduction in new cases since 2001/02, the first year analysed in this report; (2) For the fifth consecutive year there was a decrease in the number of continuing Guardianship cases open at the end of the year; (3) There are large regional variations in the rates of Guardianship usage; (4) Variations in the rate of Guardianship usage are also noticeable across different types of authorities; (5) These variations in Guardianship usage are also very apparent at Local Authority level. See [[Statistics]]
| |
| *They Work For You website: The number of complaints per mental health Trust per year from 2005-6 to 2009-10. See [[Statistics]]
| |
| | |
| ===Miscellaneous publications===
| |
| *Book uploaded. {{pagesummary|Eldergill}}
| |
| *Bruce Calderwood, Director of Mental Health and Disability, 'Mental Health Act 1983 - proposed amendments in the Health and Social Care Bill 2011' (Dept of Health Dear Colleague Letter, gateway ref 15451, 19/1/11). This sets out changes resulting from: (1) the proposed abolition of PCTs and SHAs; (2) the proposed transfer of the regulation of social workers in England from the General Social Care Council (GSCC) to the Health Professions Council (which is to be renamed the Health and Care Professions Council); (3) the proposed removal of the SOAD requirement for consenting capacitous community patients. See [[Dept of Health]]
| |
| *European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 'The legal protection of persons with mental health problems under non-discrimination law: Understanding disability as defined by law and the duty to provide reasonable accommodation in European Union Member States' (25/10/11). See [[FRA]]
| |
| *Law Commission, 'Adult Social Care: Consultation Analysis' (31/3/11). This document summaries the responses to the Adult Social Care consultation. See [[Consultations]]
| |
| *Mark Neary, 'Get Steven Home: The Book' (blog): 'The story of a year long battle to enable a young autistic man to live at home' (quotation from blog). See [[Re Steven Neary; LB Hillingdon v Steven Neary (2011) EWHC 1377 (COP)]]
| |
| *Mental Health Alliance, 'The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards' (pre-publication draft of chapter of forthcoming report, 25/11/11). The key issues are stated to be: '(1) The DoLS scheme is not fit for purpose in its present form – implementation has been extremely uneven, with the result that the protections the scheme is supposed to afford to vulnerable people are effectively unavailable in large parts of the country; (2) Its review and appeals processes do not comply with the requirements of ECHR Article 5(4), largely negating its intended purpose; (3) The scheme is incredibly bureaucratic and wasteful of scarce professional resources, and the burdensome paperwork itself discourages use; (4) Nevertheless, where agencies have managed, with a great deal of effort, to make it work reasonably well, DoLS does perform a valuable protective function and has achieved at least some of the objectives set out for it, demonstrating that there is a need for a measure of this kind.'
| |
| *MHLA, 'Destroying Representation for the Mental Unwell for £3 million?' (9/8/11). This document is the Mental Health Lawyers Association's response to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2010-11. See [[MHLA]]
| |
| *Office of Fair Trading, 'Mental capacity - OFT guidance for creditors' (September 2011, ref OFT1373). The guidance contains the following chapters: (1) Introduction; (2) Mental capacity and its relevance to a borrowing/lending decision; (3) Indicators that borrowers have, or may have, mental capacity limitations; (4) Practices and procedures; (5) Regulatory compliance and enforcement. The annexes are: (A) Useful contacts; (B) Powers of Attorney and Deputyship; (C) Other relevent guidance and legislation. See [[Office of Fair Trading]]
| |
| *On 23/12/10 the SCIE published the following document: David Thompson, 'Good practice guidance for the commissioning and monitoring of Independent Mental Capacity Advocate services', Social Care Institute for Excellence, October 2009 (updated December 2010). This good practice guide contains: (1) issues to consider when reviewing IMCA contracts; (2) a revised example service specification; (3) suggestions for assessing quality; (4) an example engagement protocol; and (5) suggested tender requirements. See [[Independent Mental Capacity Advocate service]]
| |
| *Oral ministerial statement, 'Statement on sex offenders' register' (16/2/11) added. In response to the Supreme Court decision in ''F and Thompson'', the police will be given the power to remove a sex offender from the register; there will be no right of appeal. See [[R (F and Thompson) v SSHD (2010) UKSC 17]]
| |
| *Patient information leaflets are available in the following languages: Arabic, Albanian, Bengali, Farsi (Persian), French, Gujarati, Hindi, Italian, Korean, Lithuanian, Mandarin, Pashto, Polish, Portugese, Punjabi, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Swahili, Sylheti, Tamil, Turkish, Urdu, and Vietnamese. The leaflets below were produced for a consortium of NHS Trusts and are available copyright-free. The leaflets cover: s2, s3, s5(2), s5(4), s136, s37, s37/41, s48, Guardianship, SCT, ECT, and IMHAs. See [[Foreign-language information leaflets]]
| |
| *Rezina Hakim and Tom Pollard, 'Briefing Paper 3: Independent Mental Health Advocacy' (Mental Health Alliance, dated February 2011, published 17/3/11). See [[Independent Mental Health Advocate service]]
| |
| *South West SHA and East Midlands SHA, 'Independent Investigation into the Care and Treatment Provided to Mr. X by the Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and the Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust' (22/11/11) (X is Timothy Crook); South West Strategic Health Authority, 'Report of the Independent Investigation into the care and treatment of Mr MH' (22/11/11) (MH is Michael Harris). See [[Independent inquiries]]
| |
| *The Supreme Court will hear an appeal in the ''Rabone'' case on 7/11/11. {{pagesummary|Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Trust (2010) EWCA Civ 698}}
| |
| | |
| ==Other jurisdictions==
| |
| ===Wales===
| |
| *Consultation on Mental Health (Regional Provision) (Wales) Regulations 2012 (26/9/11 to 16/12/11). 'This consultation seeks your views on regulations which would enable Local Health Boards (LHBs) and local authorities in Wales to enter into regional working arrangements.' See [[Consultations#Wales]]
| |
| *Consultation on the draft code of practice to parts 2 and 3 of the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010 (18/10/11 to 16/01/12). 'This consultation seeks views on a draft Code of Practice for care and treatment planning. It also covers reassessment for secondary mental health services under the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010. Part 2 of the Measure is concerned with: (1) the appointment of care coordinators as part of the process of planning and coordinating care; and (2) care and treatment plans for people receiving secondary mental health services. Part 3 of the Measure is concerned with: (1) former users of secondary mental health services; and (2) providing a right for them to refer themselves back to secondary services for assessment directly. The draft code sets out guiding principles and practice guidance for the operation of the Measure.' See [[Consultations#National Assembly for Wales]]
| |
| *Consultation: Mental Health (Assessment of Former Users of Secondary Mental Health Services) (Wales) Regulations 2011 (21/2/11 to 16/5/11). 'Part 3 of the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010 is concerned with mental health assessments for former users of secondary mental health services. The Welsh Assembly Government is proposing to make Regulations under this part of the Measure which will set out certain eligibility criteria for such assessments. For example, the length of time a person will be eligible for such an assessment following their discharge from services. This consultation seeks your views on these draft regulations.' See [[Consultations]]
| |
| *Consultation: Mental Health (Care Coordination and Care and Treatment Planning) (Wales) Regulations 2011 (21/2/11 to 16/5/11). '[This consultation] is concerned with the coordination of secondary mental health services, and care and treatment planning for secondary mental health service users. The Welsh Assembly Government is proposing to make Regulations connected to Part 2 of the Measure. This relates to the appointment of care coordinators and the making, reviewing and revising of care and treatment plans. This consultation seeks your views on these draft regulations.' See [[Consultations]]
| |
| *Consultation: Mental Health (Independent Mental Health Advocates) (Wales) Regulations 2011 (21/2/11 to 16/5/11). 'Part 4 of the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010 expands the statutory independent mental health advocacy scheme established by the 1983 Act. Patients subject to certain "short term" sections of the 1983 Act, and those in hospital informally (i.e. not under compulsion) are able to access the service. The Welsh Assembly Government is proposing to make Regulations connected to the expanded independent mental health advocacy scheme. This will relate to the provision, appointment and approval of advocates. It will also say which people advocates can talk to in undertaking their role of supporting patients. This consultation seeks your views on these draft Regulations.' See [[Consultations]]
| |
| *New document added: Welsh Assembly Government, 'Implementing the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010: Guidance for Local Health Boards and Local Authorities' (dated January 2011, published 3/2/11). See [[Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010]]
| |
| *On 15/3/11 both the Healthcare Inspectorate Wales and the Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales published documents entitled 'Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards: Annual Monitoring Report for Health 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010' together with various jointly-published documents. See [[DOLS]]
| |
| *Text of various circular emails about new Welsh legislation added. See [[Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010]]
| |
| *Text of Welsh update email added. 'On Tuesday 8 November 2011 the Minister for Health and Social Services laid before the National Assembly for Wales the Mental Health (Care Coordination and Care and Treatment Planning) (Wales) Regulations 2011 along with an accompanying Explanatory Memorandum. These Regulations are being introduced under Part 2 of the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010.' (extract). See [[Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010]]
| |
| *Welsh legislation consultation. 'On 7 November 2011 the Welsh Government began a formal consultation on the draft Mental Health (Primary Care Referrals and Eligibility to Conduct Primary Mental Health Assessments) (Wales) Regulations 2012. These Regulations propose arrangements which will enable GPs to refer individuals to local primary mental health support services (including individuals who are not registered with them). The Regulations also set out eligibility requirements for those who may undertake primary mental health assessments. The consultation period begins on 7 November 2011 and all responses must be submitted to the Welsh Government's Mental Health Legislation Team no later than 27 January 2012.' (Text of circular email 8/11/11.) See [[Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010]]
| |
| *Welsh legislation. The Mental Health (Assessment of Former Users of Secondary Mental Health Services) (Wales) Regulations 2011, the Mental Health (Independent Mental Health Advocates) (Wales) Regulations 2011, and accompanying Explanatory Memoranda and Regulatory Impact Assessments, have been approved. See [[Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010]] (text of 26/10/11 circular email)
| |
| | |
| ===Scotland===
| |
| *Consultation from 21/3/11 to 16/5/11. Scottish Government, 'Scottish Government Consultation: Amendment to Rule 58 of the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland (Practice and Procedure) (No. 2) Rules 2005: Rule 58: Power to Decide Case Without a Hearing'. The Scottish Government is consulting on plans to increase the availability of rule 58 which allows the Tribunal, if all parties agree in writing, to dispose of a case without an oral hearing. The three proposed options, all dispensing with the need for agreement and presumably with the intention of cutting costs, are: (1) any party wanting a hearing must show cause why a hearing is necessary, or (2) as option 1 except the patient has the automatic right to hearing if requested, or (3) as option 1 except the hearing will take place unless the patient positively elects not to have one. It is envisaged that the rule would be used 'where there is no real dispute between the parties'. See [[Consultations#Scotland]]
| |
| *Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland, 'Not Properly Authorised: Unannounced visits to people receiving treatment under the safeguards of part 16 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003' (July 2011). See also Mithran Samuel, 'Detained mental health patients treated without authorisation' (Community Care, 11/8/11). See [[Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland]]
| |
| *Scottish 'Consultation on Certification of Incapacity for Medical Treatment under Part 5 Section 47 Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000' runs from 18/7/11 to 10/10/11. 'This consultation seeks views on four issues on Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 Part 5 in relation to medical treatment. The issues are: widening the range of institutions which can offer training, whether dentists should be required to undertake training for this purpose; whether multiple section 47 medical treatment certificates should be required in some circumstances; and whether other medical practitioners not specified should be enabled to certify incapacity for medical treatment' (quotation from consultation). See [[Consultations#Scotland]]
| |
| *Scottish Government, 'Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) Annual Report 2010/11' (9/9/11). See [[MAPPA]]
| |
| *The Scottish Government consulted on plans to increase the availability of rule 58 which allows the Tribunal, if all parties agree in writing, to dispose of a case without an oral hearing. All consultation responses were published on 15/6/11. See [[Consultations#Scotland]]
| |
| | |
| ==Thanks==
| |
| Thanks are due to the following people, mostly for contributing case transcripts which were not available elsewhere. If you have anything which is not yet on the internet (e.g. court results or transcripts) then please send it in.
| |
| | |
| *Tim Baldwin, Garden Court Chambers
| |
| **[[JP v Birmingham and Solihull MH NHS Trust (2010) Upper Tribunal 30/7/10 (HM/535/2010)]] - transcript
| |
| *James Batey, Court of Protection
| |
| **[[Re FL; HN v FL and Hampshire CC (2011) EWHC 2894 (COP)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Re HM; SM v HM (2011) COP 11875043 4/11/11]] - transcript
| |
| *Claire Fife, Mental Health Legislation Manager, Welsh Assembly Government
| |
| **[[Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010]] - update emails etc
| |
| *James Gatenby, Chavasse Chambers
| |
| **[[Re GM; FP v GM and A Health Board (2011) EWHC 2778 (COP)]] - transcript
| |
| *Richard Jones, Morgan Cole LLP
| |
| **[[Selwood v Durham CC (2011) Newcastle-upon-Tyne county court 25/2/11]] - transcript
| |
| *Penny Letts, Elder Law Journal editor
| |
| **[[Re JP; DP v JCP (2010) COP 11692737]] - transcript
| |
| *Roger Pezzani, Garden Court Chambers
| |
| **[[PS v Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust (2011) UKUT 143 (AAC)]] - transcript
| |
| *Alex Ruck-Keene, 39 Essex Street
| |
| **[[Re S; D v R (the deputy of S) (2010) EWHC 3748 (COP)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[LG v DK (2011) EWHC 2453 (COP)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Re DU; A NHS Trust v DU (2009) EWHC 3504 (Fam)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[R v Hopkins; R v Priest (2011) EWCA Crim 1513]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Re CM; LBB v JM (2010) COP 5/2/10]] - transcript and summary
| |
| **[[A Local Authority v DL (2011) EWHC 1022 (Fam)]] - transcript and summary
| |
| **[[Re Hunt (2008) (Preston county court, 12/6/08)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Re P; A Local Authority v PB (2011) EWHC 502 (COP)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Re AH; AH v Hertfordshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWHC 276 (COP)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Re AVS; AVS v A NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWCA Civ 7]] - transcript
| |
| **[[TTM v LB Hackney (2011) EWCA Civ 4]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Re HM; PM v KH (2010) EWHC 3279 (Fam)]] - transcript
| |
| **[[Cardiff Council v Peggy Ross (2011) COP 28/10/11 12063905]]
| |
| *Matthew Seligman, Scott-Moncrieff Solicitors
| |
| **[[R (Sessay) v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWHC 2617 (QB)]] - detailed summary
| |
| **[[TTM v LB Hackney (2011) EWCA Civ 4]] - summary and transcript
| |
| *Amy Street, 3 Serjeants' Inn
| |
| **[[Manchester City Council v G (2011) EWCA Civ 939]] - transcript
| |
| *Paul Thorpe, Rochdale MBC
| |
| **[[R (Woods) v Rochdale MBC (2009) EWHC 323 (Admin)]] - transcript
| |
| *Ben Troke, Browne Jacobson Solicitors
| |
| **[[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1257]] - summary and commentary
| |
| *Karen Wolton, Wolton & Co Solicitors
| |
| **[[RN v Curo Care (2011) UKUT 263 (AAC)]] - transcript
| |
| | |
| ==Publication information==
| |
| Published 3/3/12
| |
| | |
| See [[Copyrights]] and [[Disclaimer]]
| |
| | |
| [[Category:Updates]]
| |