| Display title | Roger Pezzani and Alex Schymyck, 'Upper Tribunal provides important guidance on proceeding without aftercare evidence' (Garden Court Chambers, 17/11/23) |
| Default sort key | Roger Pezzani and Alex Schymyck, 'Upper Tribunal provides important guidance on proceeding without aftercare evidence' (Garden Court Chambers, 17/11/23) |
| Page length (in bytes) | 1,397 |
| Page ID | 15760 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 12:14, 2 October 2024 |
| Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 12:17, 2 October 2024 |
| Total number of edits | 2 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | Extract from this summary of SS v Cornwall Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (2023) UKUT 258 (AAC): "(1) The Tribunal should adjourn to obtain aftercare evidence where it is capable of affecting the the outcome of the hearing. AM was a relatively unusual case where aftercare evidence was not capable of affecting the outcome. (2) It is procedurally unfair to refuse an adjournment request from a patient where the detaining authority has failed to provide relevant evidence such as that addressing aftercare. (3) The Tribunal must not 'kick the can down the road' and leave matters to be resolved by a future Tribunal. Procedural fairness applies at each stage of the process and an unfair Tribunal hearing cannot be cured by the possibility of a future hearing." |