Updates
You can receive these updates by email: see Email updates.
Recent updates on website
For details of recent news items, please see the MHLO updates forum category.
- 26/06/25(1017): Tribunal victim impact statements. Ministry of Justice, 'Changes to the MHT under the Victim and Prisoner Act 2024: Victim Impact Statements and the MHT' (24 June 2025) — This letter explains the introduction of victim impact statements. The statute does not distinguish between remote and face-to-face hearings but but the letter introduces the idea that victims will only be allowed to read statements to the tribunal remotely ("Where ... the victim has applied to attend the hearing (remotely) to read their VIS aloud ..."). It notes that victims should not provide views on whether the patient should be discharged, as the statement will only be considered in relation to conditions. In relation to content: "The VIS allows the victim to explain the impact the crime has had on them and provides the Tribunal with context for any discharge condition requests they make. For example, it may cover: (a) any physical, financial, emotional or psychological injury the victim has suffered and/or any treatment they may have received as a result of the crime; (b) if they feel vulnerable or intimidated; (c) if they no longer feel safe; (d) the impact on their family; (e) how their quality of life has changed on a day-to-day basis."
- 25/06/25(1909): Tribunal victim impact statements. Alex Davies-Jones, 'Victim Impact Statements in the Mental Health Tribunal' (Ministry of Justice, statement UIN HCWS733, 24 June 2025) — This statement to Parliament announces the introduction of tribunal victim impact statements from 25 June 2025.
- 25/06/25(1853): Legislation. Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 (Commencement No. 7) Regulations 2025 — Brings s21 Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 (victim impact statements to mental health tribunals (restricted patients)) into force on 25 June 2025. It applies to to restricted patients with a s37/41 hospital order and restriction order.
- 19/06/25(0810): Job advert. Mind, London/hybrid - Head of Legal maternity cover (deadline 29 June 2025). See Jobs
- 17/06/25(1223): COP9 Correction request. Form COP9 (07.15): Application notice - Correction request — This is a form COP9 marked "CORRECTION REQUEST" at the top, in accordance with Court of Protection, 'Notice: Correction of orders pursuant to Court of Protection Rules 2017, Rule 5.15: Procedure' (17 June 2025).
- 17/06/25(1151): Slip rule procedure. Court of Protection, 'Notice: Correction of orders pursuant to Court of Protection Rules 2017, Rule 5.15: Procedure' (17 June 2025) — This notice gives examples of what does and does not fall within the scope of the slip rule, and sets out the procedure for making applications under that rule.
- 16/06/25(1123): Case (Caesarean). Oxford University NHS Foundation Trust v AX [2025] EWCOP 21 (T3) — "The Applicants seek urgent declarations that AX lacks capacity to make decisions about the imminent birth of her second child and that it is her best interests to undergo an elective Caesarean section with associated care and treatment."
- 12/06/25(1430): Case (Potentially preventable suicide). Re Pellumb Olaj (Islington Council) [2025] MHLO 13 (PFD) — The matters of concern are: "Mr Olaj had paranoid schizophrenia and had attempted to kill himself in the past, including by trying to jump from a high window on more than one occasion, but Islington Council failed to take that into account in 2020 when housing him in a sixth floor property. I heard at inquest that, in preparing for inquest (not immediately following Mr Olaj’s death), Islington has now recognised the need to take such matters into account, but I am not clear that it has mapped a way to do this for new and existing tenants."
- 12/06/25(1423): Legal Aid book review. Charlotte Collier, 'Mapping the maze: Review of Legal Aid Handbook 2024/25' (Law Society Gazette, 26 May 2025) — This review concludes: "I cannot recommend this book highly enough. It is clear, concise and comprehensive. It is exactly what the busy legal aid practitioner, whether a sole practitioner or running a large firm, needs to ensure that they can understand what can seem at times a scheme of byzantine complexity."
- 12/06/25(1416): Legal Aid book. Vicky Ling et al (eds), Legal Aid Handbook 2024/25 (LAG 2025) — Civil and criminal legal aid, including mental health law. See: Charlotte Collier, 'Mapping the maze: Review of Legal Aid Handbook 2024/25' (Law Society Gazette, 26 May 2025).
- 12/06/25(1409): MH Bill report. JCHR, 'Legislative Scrutiny: Mental Health Bill' (HC 601/HL Paper 126, 19 May 2025) — Report on Mental Health Bill 2024.
- 12/06/25(1352): Case (Conditions and review of detention). Spivak v Ukraine 21180/15 [2025] ECHR 136 — Breaches of Article 3 and Article 5 arising from psychiatric detention. This extract shows how much better oral hearings in hospital are in principle compared with court or paper-based hearings held elsewhere: "The applicant did not attend any of the court hearings; each time he signed a pre-typed request for the case to be considered in his absence. According to him, he - like other patients - had been forbidden by the Dnipro hospital administration to attend the court hearings and had been forced to sign waivers of his right to participate."
- 12/06/25(1348): Research briefing on MH Bill. Katherine Garratt, Sonja Stiebahl and Joanna Dawson, 'Research briefing: Mental Health Bill (HL) 2024-25' (House of Commons Library, 14 May 2025) — "The Mental Health Bill [HL] will have its second reading on 19 May 2025. This briefing provides background to the bill and an overview of its main provisions."
- 12/06/25(1342): Patient safety report. Health Services Safety Investigations Body, 'Mental health inpatient settings: Overarching report of investigations directed by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care' (13 May 2025) — Report following series of investigations focused on mental health inpatient settings.
- 12/06/25(0933): Case (Advance decision to refuse treatment). Re AB (ADRT: Validity and applicability) [2025] EWCOP 20 (T3) — "This case demonstrates difficulties that can arise when: (a) An individual who has made an ADRT does not provide it to a healthcare professional or make clear arrangements for it to be brought to the attention of clinicians in the event that they lose capacity to make decisions about their own medical treatment. (b) The authenticity, validity and applicability of an apparent ADRT are the subject of dispute amongst the individual's loved ones and family. (c) An ADRT which is the subject of dispute or doubt is not brought promptly to the attention of lawyers, Mental Capacity Act specialists, or the Court of Protection."
- 10/06/25(1311): Case (Treatment and detention). Rooman v Belgium 18052/11 [2019] ECHR 105 — Lack of psychiatric treatment while detained breached Article 3 and Article 5.
- 10/06/25(1305): Case (Treatment and detention). Rooman v Belgium 18052/11 [2017] ECHR 688 — Lack of psychiatric treatment while detained breached Article 3 but not Article 5. (The Grand Chamber subsequently found breaches of both Articles.)
- 06/06/25(1051): MHLA panel course now hybrid — The MHLA's mental health tribunal panel course on 24-25 June 2025 will now be a hybrid event (London and online) and the booking deadline has been moved to 19 June 2025. See MHLA: Panel course (London and online, 24-25 June 2025) for details.
- 05/06/25(1130): T110. Form T110: Application to First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health) (v05.25) — Application form for everything (including s2) except guardianship cases. The Gov.uk update notes state: "21 May 2025: Form updated with change to return address."
- 04/06/25(2138): Case (DOL authorisation complaint). Bath and North East Somerset Council (24 001 607) [2025] MHLO 12 (LGSCO) — Ombudsman's summary: "Mrs X complains the Council has failed to assess her sister’s needs properly and has failed to get the deprivation of her sister’s liberty authorised. The Council has delayed in reviewing her sister’s needs and in applying to have the deprivation of her liberty authorised. It also failed to ensure she received a consolidated response to all her concerns. The Council needs to apologise to Mrs X for the distress it has caused. It also needs to apply to the Court of Protection to have the deprivation of her sister’s liberty authorised and take action to improve its services."
- 04/06/25(1303): Job advert. Mental health panel member seeking agency work (listed until 5 September 2025). See Jobs
- 02/06/25(0931): Event. MHLA: Panel course (London and online, 24-25 June 2025) — The Mental Health Lawyers Association is an approved provider of the two-day course which must be attended by prospective members of the Law Society’s accreditation scheme (formerly called the ‘panel’). Originally to be held in London, it will now be held as a hybrid course (London and online). Please book as soon as possible and by 19 June 2025. Cost: £300 (members), £390 (non-members), £270 (group discount). See MHLA website for further details and booking information.
- 28/05/25(1325): Legislation. West London Mental Health National Health Service Trust (Establishment) (Amendment) Order 2018 — Trust name change
- 27/05/25(1104): Case (Contempt of court sentencing). Derbyshire County Council v Grundy [2025] EWCOP 2 (T1) — 28 days' immediate imprisonment to run concurrently with the activation of a 28-day suspended sentence.
- 21/05/25(2102): Case (Aftercare complaint). Staffordshire County Council (24 021 993) [2025] MHLO 11 (LGSCO) — Ombudsman's summary: "We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about Staffordshire County Council, North Staffordshire Combined Healthcare NHS Trust and NHS Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Integrated Care Board. She says they ignored her views when it moved her brother, Mr Y, to a care home, which cannot meet his mental health needs. The matter has and still is being considered by the Court of Protection. The law will not allow us to consider a complaint where court action has started."
- 20/05/25(1901): Case (Complaint about inaccurate information). London Borough of Wandsworth (24 013 072) [2025] MHLO 10 (LGSCO) — Ombudsman's summary: "Ms B complained the Council recorded inaccurate information about her late brother, Mr C, when he was assessed under the Mental Health Act. Ms B also complained the Council shared this incorrect information with her, meaning she was not aware of the reasons he was admitted to hospital. Ms B said this caused her and Mr C’s family great distress and meant Mr C did not get the care and treatment he needed. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the Council because it is unlikely we could add to the response she has already received from the Council."
- 18/05/25(2142): Case (Life and death). University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v PK [2025] EWCOP 17 (T3) — The trust sought a declaration that was is not in the patient's best interests to receive CANH, without which he would have died in a matter of days or weeks, but the judge decided that the treatment remained in his best interests.
- 18/05/25(2136): Prison transfer delays. HMPPS and NHSE, '12 month progress update following HMIP: The long wait' (May 2025) — "In April 2024, we set out improvement activities and planned activities against each of the thematic review’s key concerns (included in middle column in the table below). Key updates on progress as of March 2025, are reflected in the right-most column of the table below: ..."
- 18/05/25(2133): Prison transfer action plan. HMPPS and NHSE, 'A joint response to HMIP: The long wait' (April 2024) — "HMPPS and NHSE action plan in response to the HMIP thematic review of delays in the transfer of mentally unwell prisoners."
- 18/05/25(2128): Prison transfer delays. HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 'The long wait: A thematic review of delays in the transfer of mentally unwell prisoners' (February 2024) — "This thematic review scrutinises access to mental health care in prisons. In 2022–23, we noted delays in mental health transfers in over three-quarters of our prison inspection reports."
- 18/05/25(2122): Mental capacity law newsletter. 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Report' (issue 150, May 2025) — "Highlights this month include: (1) In the Health, Welfare and Deprivation of Liberty Report: new and updated guidance notes; (2) In the Practice and Procedure Report: naming clinicians (and other professionals), and cross-border deprivation of liberty; (3) In the Mental Health Matters Report: Section 63 MHA 1983 and diabetes, and the Mental Health Bill progresses to the Commons; (4) In the Children’s Capacity Report: the Court of Appeal explains why local authorities cannot consent to the confinement of children in their care; (5) In the Wider Context Report: the other party’s interest in litigation capacity, how far landlords are supposed to go in hoarding cases, and a new Convention on the rights of older adults on the cards? (6) In the Scotland Report: AWI reform update and cross-border deprivation of liberty – Scottish reflections what is appealable in the AWI context."
- 16/05/25(1035): Contract management guidance. Legal Aid Agency, 'Contract management: mental health guidance' (v5, 1 September 2024) — The version history states that the changes made since v4 (20 March 2023) are: "Amended to include a new provision under alternative arrangements. Designated Accredited Representatives has been removed as a provision from the mental health specification. Reference to advocacy before the Mental Health Tribunal (MHT) has been added."
- 15/05/25(1203): Case (Discharge of rule 11(7)(b) appointments). KH v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust [2025] UKUT 128 (AAC) — (1) In KH's case the representative asked for the rule 11(7)(b) appointment to be discharged on the basis that the patient had capacity and objected. The tribunal's reasons for refusing were inadequate: it was not clear that the RC or the tribunal had applied the appropriate capacity test; using the words "As such..." following a recitation of the conflicting evidence on capacity was insufficient in the absence of any analysis or evaluation; no reasons were given on best interests; no thought was given to the potential for causing distress by imposing an unwanted representative; there was no indication that the matter was kept under review. The decision had the unintended effect of reducing the effective participation of the patient, as he could not cross-examine and it appeared that neither did the representative. (2) In AH's case the tribunal did discharge the appointment, on the basis of objection and distress, but its reasons were inadequate because it failed to consider whether the patient might regain capacity with support and whether an adjournment might achieve greater participation. An adjournment cannot be used to see whether improvement will increase chances of discharge, but can be to facilitate ability to participate meaningfully. (3) In each case it could not be said with confidence that the outcome would otherwise have been the same, so the error was material and the appeal allowed.
- 14/05/25(2125): Case (PB release set aside). Re Griffiths [2023] PBSA 24 — The Parole Board had directed the release of a s47/49 patient. The Secretary of State applied for the decision to be set aside, and was successful on the basis of new information which demonstrated a change in circumstances since the direction for release.
- 12/05/25(1029): Case (Prosecution of independent hospital). R v Cygnet Health Care Limited [2023] MHLO 6 — Cygnet were fined £1,530,000, and ordered to pay £79,773.59 costs and £180 victim surcharge, after pleading guilty to failing to provide safe care and treatment contrary to regulations 12 and 22 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 at Cygnet Hospital Ealing. A patient had been able to kill herself while on the ward despite the hospital having been aware of her attempts to harm herself in an almost identical way four months earlier.
- 12/05/25(0910): Case (Non-treatment of diabetes under MHA). Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v MC [2025] EWHC 920 (Fam) — The trust sought a declaration under the inherent jurisdiction that it would be lawful not to treat a s37/41 patient in Rampton for diabetes even if that led to his physical decline and premature death. The High Court decided that: (1) the refusal to engage with the treatment plan, and the resultant end-stage complications of diabetes, were manifestations of the patient's severe personality disorder, despite his capacity to make the unwise decisions, so treatment for diabetes would be medical treatment for mental disorder within the meaning of s63 MHA 1983; (2) it would be lawful not to impose treatment as the restraint required would raise blood pressure and risk serious complications; (3) any future urgent treatment immediately necessary to save life would have to be considered separately by the clinicians at the time.
- 06/05/25(2044): Case (Local authority consent to child's DOL). J v Bath and North East Somerset Council [2025] EWCA Civ 478 — A local authority cannot give valid consent to confinement so as to remove a case from Article 5.
- 06/05/25(2022): Case (Employment status of associate hospital managers). Lancashire and South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust v Moon [2024] EAT 4 — Summary from beginning of judgment: "The [Employment] Tribunal had made no error of law in concluding that the claimant, who had been appointed as an Associate Hospital Manager, namely a person authorised by the board of the respondent NHS trust under section 23(6) of the Mental Health Act 1983, had been a worker under section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and employed under a contract personally to do work, as defined by section 83(2)(a) of the Equality Act 2010, such that it had jurisdiction to consider her substantive claims."
Monthly updates
The relevant month's updates, categorised and on one webpage: