Judges: Bean J Citations: [2005] EWHC 2468 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health, Crime Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.241528
The issue before the tribunal was whether the disorder, if established, had resulted in abnormally aggressive or seriously irresponsible conduct in the past and there was a real risk that, if treatment in hospital were discontinued, it would do so in the future. Citations: [2002] EWCA Civ 697 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited … Continue reading P, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal for East Midlands and North East Regions: CA 16 Apr 2002
application for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus – detention after convictions Citations: [2002] EWHC 243 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.347791
Citations: [2005] EWHC 2791 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health, Crime Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241530
Judges: Newman J Citations: [2004] EWHC 51 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.226860
Each applicant sought judicial review of the refusal of the tribunal to authorise their release from detention under the 1983 Act, saying that the Tribunal had accepted evidence to a lower standard of proof. Held: Neither the criminal standard of proof nor the level of proof set down in Addington applied. To raise the standard … Continue reading Regina (DJ) v Mental Health Review Tribunal; Regina (AN) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region): Admn 11 Apr 2005
The applicant’s former partner, G, had been detained under the Act. She had obtained an injunction to keep him away, but whilst exercising staying contact with her child, he had killed his own parents, and was now detained. The tribunal had ordered his conditional release. She sought a copy of the decision, and now sought … Continue reading T and others v Mental Health Review Tribunal and G: Admn 22 Feb 2002
The section placed the burden upon a specially restricted patient to prove that he was not suffering from a mental disorder of a nature or degree requiring him to be detained, before the Tribunal could order his release. This shifting of the burden was in breach of his human rights not to be detained. It … Continue reading Regina (on the application of H) v Mental Health Review Tribunal, North and East London Region: CA 28 Mar 2001
The duty of a local authority to seek to provide resources to care for a mental patient after release into the community, is not absolute, and is subject to the limitations of the availability of a sufficient budget. A continued detention in hospital of a patient because of the absence of such proper provision was … Continue reading Regina (on the application of K) v Camden and Islington Health Authority: CA 21 Feb 2001
Upon the allegedly negligent release of the claimant from mental health care, she had, while in the midst of a serious psychotic episode, derived from the schizophrenia, killed her mother and been convicted of manslaughter. She now sought damages in negligence. The defendant relied upon a defence of illegality. Held: All the heads of claim … Continue reading Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust: CA 3 Aug 2018
The appellant was detained under section 37 of the 1983 Act as a mental patient with a restriction under section 41. He sought his release. Held: The standard of proof in such applications remained the balance of probabilities, but that standard was flexible, and varied according to the seriousness of the allegation. The only misdirection … Continue reading AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others: CA 21 Dec 2005
The appellant Khera’s father had obtained leave to settle in the UK. The appellant obtained leave to join him, but did not disclose that he had married. After his entry his wife in turn sought to join him. The appellant was detained as an illegal immigrant. Held: The term ‘illegal immigrant’ included anyone entering unlawfully. … Continue reading Khera v Secretary of State for The Home Department; Khawaja v Secretary of State for The Home Department: HL 10 Feb 1983
This appeal, from an order dismissing the Appellant’s claim for judicial review, raises a short but important point as to the effect of a hospital order made under section 37 of the Mental Health Act 1983: does such an order cease to have effect if . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Citations: [2005] EWHC 1366 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.228313
The applicant had been detained after a diagnosis of Bipolar Affective Disorder and convictions for rape. He had applied for discharge, but before the hearing the doctor had said he no longer opposed his release. After the hearing but before being released the detention was re-instated, and the patient again complained at proposals to treat … Continue reading B, Regina (on the Application Of) v SS (Responsible Medical Officer) and others: CA 26 Jan 2006
Appeal against the imposition of the restriction order Judges: Mr Justice Nelson Citations: [2002] EWCA Crim 1698 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.175256
Doctors are to take great care when considering making a recommendation of an order under sections 37 or 41. Citations: Ind Summary 17-Jul-1995 Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing, Health Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.88328
The defendant appealed against a sentence of imprisonment for robberies. He had a history of mental illness and had been diagnosed schizophrenic. He applied to be made subject to an order under the Act, which would replace the sentence with a treatment order, and agreed to be made subject to an extended restriction order. Held: … Continue reading Regina v Atie: CACD 23 Apr 1998
Appeal against sentence for making hoax bomb calls. A hospital order had been made under section 31, and she now appealed against the section 41 restriction order. Held: The hospital, in reality, is operating as a form of prison, because she is not making medical headway there, but it is not a particularly effective prison … Continue reading Regina v HP (Aka C): CACD 26 May 2010
Judicial review of continued detention of claimant under hospital order Judges: Collins J Citations: [2005] EWHC 921 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Taylor, Regina (on the Application of) v Haydn-Smith and Another Admn 27-May-2005 Whether a detained mental patient could be obliged … Continue reading Regina (B) v Haddock: Admn 20 May 2005
The defendant was convicted of manslaughter with diminished responsibility. The court was now asked whether it was correct to order a discretionary life sentence or to impose a hospital order pursuant to section 37 of the 1983 Act, with a restriction requirement pursuant to section 41. It was accepted that if a hospital order coupled … Continue reading Welsh v Regina: CACD 1 Feb 2011
Judges: Ben J Citations: [2008] EWHC 1707 (Admin), [2008] MHLR 290 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health, Crime Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.277866
The claimant had been detained by the respondent under the Act. A trubunal had ordered his release subject to proper arrangements for his support in the community. In the absence of such arrangements being made, he complained at his continued detention. Held: The conditions were inextricably linked to the release, and though there was a … Continue reading W v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 6 May 2004
Renewed application for leave to appeal after conviction on plea for common assault and sentence to a hospital order and restriction without time under section 41. Held: ‘the overall history that we have described and the balance of the psychiatric evidence did not justify making a restriction order in this case.’ The restriction was removed. … Continue reading MMK, Regina v: CACD 25 Nov 2002
JB challenged his detention under the 1983 Act. Held: The judicial review procedure afforded a sufficient appeal procedure for a detainee. Judges: Auld LJ, Scott Baker LJ, neuberger LJ Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ 961, [2006] HRLR 40 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – T-Mobile … Continue reading JB, Regina (on the Application of) v Responsible Medicial Officer, Dr Haddock: CA 11 Jul 2006
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1726 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health, Prisons Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238606
‘This appeal against sentence demonstrates some of the practical differences between, and advantages and disadvantages of, a ‘hybrid order’ under section 45A of the Mental Health Act 1983 (‘MHA’) combining imprisonment with a hospital direction and limitation direction on the one hand, and a ‘hospital and restriction order’ under section 37 MHA with section 41 … Continue reading Nelson v Regina: CACD 2 Dec 2020
Hughes LJ said that the detention for public protection regime and that under sections 37/41 of the 1983 Act have features in common. Under both, release is discretionary in the hands of the Secretary of State, effectively the Ministry of Justice. There is no absolute right to release. The test for the exercise of the … Continue reading Attorney-General’s Reference No 54 of 2011: CACD 2012
The claimant suffered psychiatric injury in a rail crash caused by the defendant’s negligence. Under this condition of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, the claimant had later gone on to kill another person, and he had been detained under section 41. He now sought damages for his loss of earnings through detention in prison and mental hospital. … Continue reading Gray v Thames Trains and Others: HL 17 Jun 2009
The defendant appealed his conviction of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm. He was made subject to a hospital order without limit of time under sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983. Judges: Lord Justice Latham (Vice President of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division) Mr Justice Royce Mr Justice … Continue reading Johnson, Regina v: CACD 9 Jul 2007
The applicant had been ordered to be deported and returned to Angola, but at the same time he was a detained mental patient. He argued that a return would breach his Article 8 rights. Held: The respondent was entitled to decide to deport the appellant notwithstanding that he was still subject to orders under sections … Continue reading MJ (Angola) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 20 May 2010
Choice of mental Health Sentencing Options On conviction of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility, the judge imposed a hospital order and a restriction, without limit of time, under sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983. The AG appealed it as too lenient, suggesting imprisonment for life with a limitation restriction under … Continue reading Lall, Regina v: CACD 19 Mar 2021
Appeals against the imposition of a restriction order under section 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983 imposed in conjunction with a section 37 order under the same Act Citations: [2000] EWCA Crim 3539 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.331143
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio A claim was made for the price of goods which the plaintiff sold to the defendant in Dunkirk, knowing that the defendant’s purpose was to smuggle the goods into England. The plaintiff was met with a defence of illegality. Held: The defence failed. Knowledge on the part of the … Continue reading Holman v Johnson: 5 Jul 1775
After conviction of manslaughter with diminished responsibility, the defendant now argued that the imposition of an extended sentence of imprisonment with a hospital direction under section 45A was wrong in principle, contrary, as it was, to the unanimous view of the psychiatrists involved in his case that the appropriate sentence was a hospital order under … Continue reading Westwood, Regina v: CACD 6 May 2020
The claimants sought damages from the defendant local authority after their identities had been wrongfully revealed to the natural parents of the adoptees leading to a claimed campaign of harassment. The adopters has specifically requested that their names and address be not revealed, but they details were let slip in a case conference. Both parties … Continue reading B and B v A County Council: CA 21 Nov 2006
The appellants challenged the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment imposed on them on their convictions for murder. They said it was an infringement of their Human Rights, being arbitrary and disproportionate. Held: The case followed on where the Anderson case left off. In these cases the judge had noted that he did not think the … Continue reading Regina v Lichniak: HL 25 Nov 2002
The court considered issues arising from the sentencing of mentally ill offenders to indeterminate terms of imprisonment.As to the release provisions relating to those subject to an order under ss 37/41 and those made subject to a s 45A order, Hallett LJ said: ‘A level of misunderstanding of the guidance offered in Vowles appears to … Continue reading Edwards, Regina v: CACD 27 Mar 2018
The court considered appeals by prisoners subject to indeterminate sentences (either imprisonment for public protection (IPP) or a life sentence) passed between 1997 and 2008, where there had been medical evidence before the court suggesting the possibility of a hospital order, and ‘a major effect of the decision of a judge to impose an indeterminate … Continue reading Vowles and Others, Regina v: CACD 5 Feb 2015
The defendant’s appeal against murder had succeeded, and a conviction for manslaughter substituted. The court now asked what should be his sentence. Held: The medical evidence showed that he suffered a mental illness and it is of a nature and degree making it appropriate that he be detained in hospital. The Court made a section … Continue reading Regina v Weekes: CACD 4 May 1999
Referral by the Criminal Cases Review Commission – conviction on plea of attempted murder. Leave is sought to admit fresh evidence that at the time of the offence the appellant suffered Autism Spectrum Disorder (‘ASD’). On the basis of that evidence it is submitted that the appropriate sentence was, and is, a hospital order pursuant … Continue reading Cleland v Regina: CACD 16 Jul 2020
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide after being given home leave on a secure ward by the respondent mental hospital. A claim in negligence had been settled, but the parents now appealed refusal of their claim that the hospital had failed in its article 2 duty to respect her right to life. Held: The decision … Continue reading Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Trust: CA 21 Jun 2010
Compulsory administration of treatment to detained mental patient. The court considered, but left open, the relationship between the ‘convincingly shown’ standard of proof, and the decision of the House of Lords in In re H as to the civil standard of proof in English law. He proceeded on the basis of the ‘convincingly shown’ standard, … Continue reading B v Responsible Medical Officer, Broadmoor Hospital, Dr SS and others: Admn 8 Sep 2005
The claimant was a victim of the Ladbroke Grove rail crash. He later committed and was convicted of a manslaughter and detained under the 1983 Act. He said that the accident had caused a major personality change. The defendant relied on the defence of ex turpi causa non oritur actio. Held: The claimant’s appeal succeeded. … Continue reading Gray v Thames Trains Ltd and Another: CA 25 Jun 2008
The claimant said that the defendant hospital had been negligent in failing to prevent her daughter escaping from the mental hospital at which she was detained and committing suicide. Held: The status of a detained mental patient was more akin to that of a prisoner than of a patient because of the control exercised and … Continue reading Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and Another: CA 21 Dec 2007
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
The claimant council alleged that the defendant had acted to abuse its dominant market position in the provision of bus services in the city. Held: It was for the claimant to show that the defendant had a dominant position. It had not done so, and was mistaken in confining their analysis to the bus market. … Continue reading Chester City Council and Another v Arriva Plc and others: ChD 15 Jun 2007
Judges: Sullivan J Citations: [2002] EWHC 1521 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.241519
The plaintiffs were Indian Chiefs from Canada. They complained that the 1982 Act which granted independence to Canada, had been passed without their consent, which they said was required. They feared the loss of rights embedded by historical treaties. The Attorney General sought the strike out of the claims. Held: The application for a strike … Continue reading Manuel and Others v Attorney-General; Noltcho and Others v Attorney-General: ChD 7 May 1982
The wife petitioned for divorce, alleging cruelty. Held: It had not been a misdirection for the petitioner to have to prove her case beyond reasonable doubt: ‘A high standard of proof’ was required because of the importance of such a case to the parties and the community. although it was a misdirection for a judge … Continue reading Bater v Bater: CA 1951
The court had to decide the extent to which the Parole Board could rely on hearsay evidence in a case in which a discretionary life prisoner’s licence had been revoked. The evidence was crucial to the issue of risk. Held: (majority) The Board’s decision which had relied upon the hearsay evidnce was upheld. Kennedy LJ: … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Brooks v The Parole Board: CA 10 Feb 2004
B having been made subject to a court hospital order classifying him as suffering from a mental illness, complained when he was later detained under section 63 as subject to a personality disorder. Held: At all times, B was classified as suffering from a mental illness, and the tribunal had not said his condition was … Continue reading B, Regina (on the Application of) v Ashworth Hospital Authority: CA 15 Apr 2003
The patient refused consent to treatment in the form of injection of drugs, which her psychiatrists considered to be necessary. Held: Treatment of this nature infringed the patients rights, and was not to be ordered without clear reason. The doctors had to show that it was a medical necessity, and this had to be shown … Continue reading Regina (N) v Dr M and Others: CA 6 Dec 2002
The defendant was mentally ill. He had been convicted of a second serious offence, and now appealed the life sentence imposed. Psychiatrists had recommended a hospital order, but such an order could not now be made by virtue of the 2000 Act save in exceptional circumstances. It was said to be wrong automatically to impose … Continue reading Regina v Drew: HL 8 May 2003
The court heard four appeals considering s 11(3) of the 1968 Act ‘which requires this court, on an appeal against sentence, to exercise its powers such that ‘taking the case as a whole, the appellant is not more severely dealt with on appeal than he was dealt with by the court below’. Articulating the issue … Continue reading Thompson v Regina: CACD 27 Mar 2018
The prisoner had been sentenced to an extended term of five years imprisonment for indecent assault. He had been released, and then recalled for alleged breaches of his licence. The respondent appealed findings that such a recall was subject to article 5, and that his release would be mandatory under s44A(b) if his continued detention … Continue reading Regina (Sim) v Parole Board: CA 18 Dec 2003
(Scotland) A detention in hospital which was capable of preventing the deterioration of a psychopathic disorder in a patient was sufficient to bring his detention within the requirement for treatment which might alleviate a condition, which phrase has a wide meaning. ‘Medical treatment’ could include treatment which alleviates or prevents a deterioration of the symptoms … Continue reading Hutchison Reid v Secretary Of State For Scotland and Another: HL 5 Feb 1998
Even where there is culpability, a hospital order with a restriction order may well be the appropriate way to deal with a dangerous and disordered person.Mustill LJ discussed the effect of a restriction order: ‘In marked contrast with the regime under an ordinary hospital order, is an order coupled with a restriction on discharge pursuant … Continue reading Regina v Birch: CACD 1989
For reasons of policy or pragmatism, the actual criminal standard of proof may be used in civil proceedings such as contempt of court. Contempt of court is a criminal offence. Accordingly, the burden of proving that the defendant is in contempt rests on the claimant and the facts constituting any contempt must be proved to … Continue reading In re Bramblevale Ltd: 1970
(US Supreme Court) To commit an individual to a mental institution in civil proceedings, the state was required by the ‘due process’ clause of the US Constitution to prove by clear and convincing evidence the statutory preconditions to commitment. That was an intermediate standard, between proof beyond reasonable doubt and proof on the preponderance of … Continue reading Addington v Texas: 30 Apr 1979
Statutory Duty Not Extended by Common Law The claimant sought damages after a road accident. The driver came over the crest of a hill and hit a bus. The road was not marked with any warning as to the need to slow down. Held: The claim failed. The duty could not be extended to include … Continue reading Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council: HL 1 Apr 2004
Lack of Patient Safeguards was Infringement The claimant had been detained at a mental hospital as in ‘informal patient’. He was an autistic adult. He had been recommended for release by the Mental Health Review Tribunal, and it was decided that he should be released. He was detained further pending suitable arrangements being made for … Continue reading HL v United Kingdom: ECHR 2004
Insanity Plea not for D believing he had no choice The court was asked whether the defence of insanity would be available to a psychotic and deluded defendant who was aware that his act was wrong, but believed himself compelled to perform it. The defendant, with a history of mental problems, had attacked family in … Continue reading Keal, Regina v: CACD 18 Mar 2022
The 1987 Regulations provided additional benefits for disabled persons, but excluded from benefit those who had nowhere to sleep. The claimant said this was irrational. He had been receiving the disability premium to his benefits, but this was cancelled when he lost his home. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The disabilty premium, as part of … Continue reading RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 22 Oct 2008
(Northern Ireland) The deceased solicitor was murdered in his home in 1989, allegedly by loyalists. They had never been identified, though collusion between security forces and a loyalist paramilitary was established. The ECHR and a judge led inquiry had said that a proper investigation was required. A promised inquiry under the 2005 Act was objected … Continue reading Finucane, Re Application for Judicial Review: SC 27 Feb 2019
The claimant had been convicted of the murder of his girlfriend. On his acquittal on appeal, the police criticised the CPS decision not to retry the claimant, in effect, the claimant now said, continuing the accusation against him, and so defaming him. The defendant pleaded justification. Held: The prosecution case rested in substantial part on … Continue reading Bento v The Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police: QBD 1 Jun 2012
A Dutch national detained in hospital complained that his detention had divested him of his capacity to administer his property, and thus there had been determination of his civil rights and obligations without the guarantee of a judicial procedure. Held: Article 5(1)(a) is concerned with the question whether the detention is permissible. Its object and … Continue reading Winterwerp v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Oct 1979
Exercise of Prerogative Power is Reviewable The House considered an executive decision made pursuant to powers conferred by a prerogative order. The Minister had ordered employees at GCHQ not to be members of trades unions. Held: The exercise of a prerogative power of a public nature may be, subject to constraints of national security and … Continue reading Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service: HL 22 Nov 1984
False Prospectus – Issuers liable in Deceit The directors of a company issued a prospectus, falsely stating that the proceeds were to be used to complete alterations to the buildings of the company, to purchase horses and vans and to develop the trade of the company. In fact it was to pay off pressing liabilities. … Continue reading Edgington v Fitzmaurice: CA 7 Mar 1885
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002
The applicant, a Pakistani national had entered the UK to act as a Muslim priest. The Home Secretary was satisfied that he was associated with a Muslim terrorist organisation, and refused indefinite leave to remain. The Home Secretary provided both open and closed statements to the tribunal. The open statement accepted that the organisation was … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rehman: HL 11 Oct 2001
The defendant appealed the making of a sex offender order under 1998 Act. The justices had found that the defendant was a sex offender within section 2(1)(a) and that he had acted on a number of occasions in a way which brought him within section 2(1)(b). Held: The civil standard of proof is flexible and … Continue reading B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary: QBD 5 Apr 2000
The Sentence Review Commissioners had decided not to order the release of the prisoner, who was serving a life sentence. He had been released on licence from a life sentence and then committed further serious sexual offences against under-age girls and was recalled. In considering his application for a further licence he complained that the … Continue reading In re D; Doherty, Re (Northern Ireland); Life Sentence Review Commissioners v D: HL 11 Jun 2008
Proof Standard for Misrepresentation The court was asked what was the standard of proof required to establish the tort of misrepresentation, and it contrasted the different standards of proof applicable in civil and criminal cases. Held: The standard was the balance of probabilities. It was for the plaintiff to establish that the defendant had the … Continue reading Hornal v Neuberger Products Ltd: CA 1956
A court should take great care before setting aside a decision of a judge which had involved the exercise of a judicial discretion. The court considered the duty of an appellate court in a children case: ‘What this court should seek to do is to answer the question whether the court discerns a wrongness in … Continue reading G v G (Minors: Custody appeal): CA 1985
The House was asked as to the standard of proof required to establish that adultery had been condoned under the subsection. Held: Lord Denning said: ‘In short it comes to this: so far as the grounds for divorce are concerned, the case, like any civil case, may be proved by a preponderance of probability, but … Continue reading Blyth v Blyth: HL 1966
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still been been found. Held: A care order could … Continue reading In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof): HL 14 Dec 1995
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant was an attorney. A complaint was made that he had been given money to buy land, but neither had the land been conveyed nor the money returned. The complaint began in 1988, but final speeches were not heard until . .
The psychiatrist had been engaged by W’s solicitors to examine him and prepare a report to go to the Tribunal hearing an application for the transfer or conditional discharge of W from a secure unit. His report was damning. W withdrew the . .
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
References: 60 L Ed 2d 323, 60 L Ed 323, 99 SCt 1804, 441 US 418 Links: Worldlii Coram: Burger CJ (US Supreme Court) To commit an individual to a mental institution in civil proceedings, the state was required by the ‘due process’ clause of the US Constitution to prove by clear and convincing evidence … Continue reading Addington v Texas; 30 Apr 1979
