For civil patients, it matters a great deal whether the classification of their condition is ‘severe subnormality’ or just ‘subnormality’ or whether it is ‘mental illness’ or ‘psychopathic disorder’. Lawton LJ discussed the construction of the phrase ‘mental illness’: ‘The answer in my judgment is to be found in the advice which Lord Reid gave … Continue reading W v L: CA 1974
A patient discharged conditionally under one part of the Act can still be detained properly under another. They constitute separate and distinct codes. Citations: Times 27-Aug-1997 Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.87451
Proceedings before the Mental Health Review Tribnal had been very nearly all held in private. The patient, Ian Brady sought to have his hearing in public. Held: Beatson J approved the Tribunal’s reasons forfind that their privacy rules were a proper and proportionate departure from the principle of open justice and thus compatible with article … Continue reading Mersey Care NHS Trust, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and others: Admn 22 Jul 2004
The claimant was a mental patient under compulsory detention, and complained that he had been subjected to periods of seclusion. Held: The appeal succeeded. The hospital had failed to follow the appropriate Code of Practice. The Code was not obligatory, but following it would generally ensure that a patient’s rights were not infringed. It recognised … Continue reading Munjaz v Mersey Care National Health Service Trust And the Secretary of State for Health, the National Association for Mental Health (Mind) Respondent interested;: CA 16 Jul 2003
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 court was asked ‘When a mental health review tribunal has ordered the discharge of a patient, is it lawful to readmit him under section 2 or section 3 of the [Mental Health Act 1983] where it cannot be demonstrated that there has been a relevant change of circumstances?’ Held: There was nothing to prevent … Continue reading Regina (Count Franz Von Brandenburg (aka Hanley) ) v East London and The City Mental Health NHS Trust, Snazell, Approved Social worker: 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
An application for the discharge of a mental patient under section 72, was to be based on the same criteria as would found the original decision to authorise detention under section 3. The criteria would mirror each other save that the burden of proof was reversed. It was correct to take account of the possibility … Continue reading Regina v London South West Region Mental Health Review Tribunal, Ex Parte Moyle: QBD 10 Feb 2000
The patient had been detained, and then secluded within the mental hospital for 11 days. He claimed to have been subjected to inhuman treatment, and false imprisonment. Held: His claim failed. The policy allowed the authority to confine him to a locked room under supervision for the protection of others. The fact of seclusion did … Continue reading S v Airedale National Health Service Trust: QBD 22 Aug 2002
The Court of Appeal issued habeas corpus because the applicant was committed to a mental institution pursuant to an application which was made by somebody who lacked the statutory authority to make it. The right of personal freedom is fundamental. In the mental health context, if someone is to be taken out of the community … Continue reading In re S-C (Mental Patient: Habeas Corpus): CA 22 Nov 1995
A mother sought to challenge guidelines issued by the respondent which would allow doctors to protect the confidentiality of women under 16 who came to them for assistance even though the sexual activities they might engage in would be unlawful. Held: A person under 16 who was otherwise competent was entitled to seek medical assistance, … Continue reading Axon, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another: Admn 23 Jan 2006
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
The plaintiff had killed someone and, as a result, been convicted of manslaughter and ordered to be detained in a secure hospital when subject to after-care under section 117 of the 1983 Act. He sought damages from the health authority on the basis that he would not have killed anyone but for negligence on the … Continue reading Clunis (By his Next Friend Prince) v Camden and Islington Health Authority: CA 5 Dec 1997
The claimants appealed against the imposition on them of smoking bans while they were compulsorily detained at Rampton Hospital. They said that other persons detained for example in prisons had been exempted fully. Held: The right or freedom to smoke does not engage article 8(1) of the Convention. The appeal failed: ‘We reject the argument … Continue reading N, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health; Regina (E) v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust: CA 24 Jul 2009
The patient was detained under the Act. The Mental Health Tribunal decided he should be released. The hospital disagreed. The patient continued to reside to the Hospital voluntarily, but the hospital viewed the decision to release him as . .
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
The applicant had been a discretionary life prisoner. His minimum period of detention had passed, but he continued to be detained under a transfer order for his treatment as mental health patient. Held: The absence of any means for him to challenge his continued detention infringed his rights. Had the Mental Health Review Tribunal decided … Continue reading Regina (D) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 19 Dec 2002
The claimant sought to unravel a settlement she had made as receiver for her late husband, saying that it had been made without consideration of its Inheritance Tax implications. The Revenue said that there was no operative mistake so as to allow the rule in Hastings-Bass to apply allowing the variation. Held: For the rule … Continue reading Pitt and Another v Holt and Another: ChD 18 Jan 2010
The issue that arises in this case concerns non-compliant incapacitated patients, that is those who are not willing to be admitted and do not have the capacity to consent to admission, to psychiatric hospitals pending the making of an application for their compulsory admission to hospital for assessment under section 2 Mental Health Act 1983 … Continue reading Sessay, Regina (on The Application of) v South London and Maudsley Nhs Foundation Trust and Another: QBD 13 Oct 2011
The applicant was a discretionary life prisoner compulsorily detained in a mental hospital. His tariff had now expired. If not detained under the 1983 Act he would now be entitled to a review. He argued that there should be a joint hearing. Held: There is no necessary breach of the requirement of a speedy hearing … Continue reading P, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 11 Dec 2003
A discretionary life prisoner who had been transferred to a mental hospital is not automatically eligible for a certificate under the section. The right conferred on a discretionary life prisoner by section 34 of the 1991 Act did not extend to those who were also detained under the MHA by reason of transfer and restriction … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte H and Others, Regina v Same ex parte Hickey: CA 29 Jul 1994
The applicant, detained under the section by the respondent, appealed refusal of a judicial review and a writ of habeas corpus. He had applied for a review of his detention. The review had been heard by a panel of three. Two judged in his favour. Held: The Act required a minimum of three votes in … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Tagoe-Thompson v the Hospital Managers of the Park Royal Centre: CA 12 Mar 2003
X suffered both severe anorexia and alcoholism. She had in the past been repeatedly and compulsorily admitted to hospital for treatment, but her doctors considered that whilst this might be life extending treatment it had proved ineffective and unethical. They sought a declaration that they may not be obliged to offer the treatment again. The … Continue reading A NHS Foundation Trust v Ms X (By Her Litigation Friend, The Official Solicitor): CoP 8 Oct 2014
Action for an account from patient’s receiver. Citations: [2005] EWHC 1274 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health, Trusts Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.227095
ECHR Article 14 Discrimination Alleged discrimination in entitlement to social security benefits of prisoners in psychiatric care compared to other persons detained for psychiatric treatment: inadmissible Facts – Under the relevant domestic legislation prisoners were not entitled to social security benefits while serving a prison sentence, including during any periods they were required to spend … Continue reading SS And Others v The United Kingdom (Dec): ECHR 21 Apr 2015
G was a prisoner who was refused permission by the Home Secretary to consult a solicitor with a view to bringing libel proceedings against a prison officer. The court construed article 6 of ECHR, which provides that ‘in the determination of his civil rights . . everyone is entitled to a fair . . hearing’, … Continue reading Golder v The United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Feb 1975
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
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court of Appeal permitting the action. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Airedale NHS Trust v Bland: HL 4 Feb 1993
Application for judicial review of the decision of the district judge, sitting at Bath and Wansdyke Magistrates’ Court, not to order a fact-finding exercise rather than a trial. Citations: [2009] EWHC 759 (Admin), [2009] MHLR 71 Links: Bailii Statutes: Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 11(1), Mental Health Act 1983 37(3) Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Blouet v Bath and Wansdyke Magistrates Court: Admn 12 Mar 2009
The House was asked whether a patient detained for treatment under the 1983 Act can be treated against his will for any mental disorder from which he is suffering or only for the particular form of mental disorder from which he is classified as suffering for the purpose of the order or application authorising his … Continue reading B, Regina (on the Application of) v Ashworth Hospital Authority: HL 17 Mar 2005
Citations: [1997] EWHC Admin 174 Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 43 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.137119
The applicant had been a detained mental patient. He was granted a deferred order for his release. He challenged the delay of the respondent and his refusal to allow release under section 17 for overnight stays out of the hospital. Held: The secretary of state had a duty to act with reasonable speed. The department … Continue reading Regina (A) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 30 Jul 2002
The claimant said that he had been indirectly discriminated against on racial grounds. He was dismissed after being elected as a local councillor for the BNP. The employer considered that for Health and Safety reasons, his dismissal was necessary because of the upset and disturbance his continued employment would create with Asian co-workers and passengers. … Continue reading A C Redfearn v Serco Ltd T/A West Yorkshire Transport Service: EAT 27 Jul 2005
The defendant had been convicted of various offences of violence but then was then to be held in a secure mental hospital. A place was not available, and an order only became available some nine months later, at which time, he argued that the order was no longer appropriate. In the meantime the defendant had … Continue reading Plinio Galfetti v Regina: CACD 31 Jul 2002
The patient did not wish her nearest relative, namely her sister, to be involved with her case and there was evidence that she would be so distressed by the sister being consulted that it could harm her health. The sister likewise did not wish to become involved. Held: When an adult whose mental health is … Continue reading E, Regina (on the Application of) v Bristol City Council: Admn 13 Jan 2005
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
Application for permission to appeal against orders made dismissing the applicant’s challenge to her detention pursuant to section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983. Her case was that section 11(4) of that Act had not been complied with. Citations: [2002] EWCA Civ 1153 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 23 June 2022; … Continue reading Ganatra, Regina (on the Application Of) v London Borough of Ealing and others: CA 18 Jul 2002
Challenge to directions given by the respondent for the recall of the appellant to a mental hospital. Held: The breach of a condition would, if of ‘sufficient significance’ justify a recall. Judges: Keene, Gage, Toulson LJJ Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 687 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: … Continue reading MM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Jul 2007
A ten-year old boy had died from Addison’s disease. No inquest took place, because the coroner decided that the boy had died of natural causes. The parents, who were also affected by the events, had accepted compensation from the local health authority, and discontinued a claim for damages for negligence against the doctors, and a … Continue reading Powell v United Kingdom: ECHR 4 May 2000
The applicant was mentally ill, and had at various times received inpatient treatment, and also detained. After conviction for harassment offences he was imprisoned, but then again hospitalized and detained under s3 whilst released in licence. Upon his impending release from hospital, the respondent ordered him to be returned to prison. He absconded form the … Continue reading Regina (S) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 5 Nov 2002
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
An asylum seeker had come to be detained under the Mental Health Act. The Home Secretary, having refused the asylum application, ordered him to be repatriated. Held: Though the Secretary of State could only exercise his powers of removal under section 86 of the MHA if it appeared to him to be in the patient’s … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte X: CA 9 Jan 2001
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal procedure, and the applicant sought a … Continue reading Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947
The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq war broke out, under which the charterer could have terminated the charter as of right. The defendant … Continue reading Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’): HL 28 Mar 2007
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares. Held: The duties of an auditor are founded in contract and the extent of the duties … Continue reading Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others: HL 8 Feb 1990
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to share information was outwith the powers of the Parliament. It extended the information to be … Continue reading The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate: SC 28 Jul 2016
The defendants, young boys, had set fire to paper and thrown the lit papers into a wheelie bin, expecting the fire to go out. In fact substantial damage was caused. The House was asked whether a conviction was proper under the section where the defendant had given no thought to a risk of damage, but … Continue reading Regina v G and R: HL 16 Oct 2003
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
These proceedings raise points of principle in respect of the powers of NHS Foundation Trusts pursuant to the National Health Service Act 2006 (‘the 2006 Act’) regarding financial assistance to patients whilst they are detained pursuant to hospital orders made under the Mental Health Act 1983 (‘the 1983 Act’). In essence they raise a question … Continue reading Mitocariu and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust: Admn 31 Jan 2018
Appeal from hospital order Judges: Lord Justice Holroyde Mr Justice Picken Recorder of Manchester (His Honour Judge Dean QC) (Sitting as a Judge of the Cacd) Citations: [2021] EWCA Crim 2004 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 37 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing Updated: 04 April 2022; Ref: scu.674621
The claimant had spent his childhood in foster care, and now claimed damages against a local authority for decisions made and not made during that period. The judge’s decision to strike out the claim had been upheld by the Court of Appeal. Held: An adult formerly in the care of a local authority as a … Continue reading Barrett v London Borough of Enfield: HL 17 Jun 1999
The plaintiff bought her apartment, but discovered later that the foundations were defective. The local authority had supervised the compliance with Building Regulations whilst it was being built, but had failed to spot the fault. The authority appealed a finding that it was liable, arguing that the claims were time barred and that it had … Continue reading Anns and Others v Merton London Borough Council: HL 12 May 1977
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
Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful 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 undertakings from the journalists not to publish any element of the interview. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was established in three prison officers. In one case the officer opened the letter in front … Continue reading Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege. Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of ensuring human rights as a right of privacy, and is recognised in European law (A M and S Europe Ltd). A … Continue reading Regina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd: HL 16 May 2002
Capacity for Litigation The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the time to accept the offer. Held: There is no definition … Continue reading Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1): CA 19 Dec 2002
From 4 April 2005 until 3 December 2012, English law provided for the imposition of sentences of imprisonment for public protection (‘IPP’). The Court addressed the practical and legal issues resulting from the new system. Held: The decision as to whether to impose an IPP senence and whether a prisoner was ready for release on … Continue reading Sturnham, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board of England and Wales and Another (No 2): SC 3 Jul 2013
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
The applicants were former mental patients who had been admitted to hospital compulsorily under section 3. On their release they were to be given support under section 117. The authorities sought to charge for these services, and appealed a decision that the services should be free. Held: Section 117 imposed a clear and free standing … Continue reading Regina v Manchester City Council, ex parte Stennett etc: HL 25 Jul 2002
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 appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not been, and each had claimed there was no basis for his continued detention, … Continue reading Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another: SC 1 May 2013
The deceased had committed suicide on escaping from a mental hospital. The Trust appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim that that they had been negligent in having inadequate security. Held: The Trust’s appeal failed. The fact that she was detained for her own protection rather than to protect others required different standards … Continue reading Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (MIND intervening): HL 10 Dec 2008
The claimant telecoms companies objected to a proposed scheme for future licensing of available spectrum. The scheme anticipated a bias in favour of auctioniung such content. It was not agreed whether any challenge to the decision should be by way of appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal or by judicial review. The CAT had declined … Continue reading T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd. and Another v Office of Communications: CA 12 Dec 2008
Various family settlements had been created. The trustees wished to use the rule in Hastings-Bass to re-open decisions they had made after receiving incorrect advice. Held: The deeds were set aside as void. The Rule in Hastings-Bass derives from trust law, not the law of mistake. The principle does not exist to relieve advisors from … Continue reading Futter and Another v Futter and Others: ChD 11 Mar 2010
No ET Jurisdiction for Non-employment claim The claimant appealed against rejection of her claim for discrimination which she had brought in the Employment Tribunal rather than the County Court. Held: The appeal failed: ‘if a body is a governing body of a university this displaces its status as a qualification body. It follows that the … Continue reading Nwabueze v University of Law Ltd and Others: CA 13 Nov 2020
The court considered the Rule in Hastings-Bass, and specifically (1) whether the trustee’s decision is open to challenge when the failure to take a consideration into account is not attributable to a breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the trustee; and (2) whether, where a decision is open to challenge on the ground … Continue reading Abacus Trust Company (Isle of Man) Colyb Limited v Barr, Barr, and Barr: ChD 6 Feb 2003
The deceased had created a settlement in favour of his wife. He suffered serious injury and placed the damages in trust, but in a form which created an unnecessary liability to Inheritance Tax on his death. The wife’s mental health act receiver now sought the unravelling of the trust based on either Hastings Bass or … Continue reading Pitt and Another v Holt and Others: ChD 18 Jan 2010
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
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised. Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an Industrial Tribunal is not … Continue reading Meek v City of Birmingham District Council: CA 18 Feb 1987
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
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: [2000] MHLR 183 Coram: Jackson J The claimant was detained iin a secure mental hospital. He complained of being held in seclusion for a long period, and as to the hospital’s policy. Held: The hospital’s policy, by reducing the frequency of review of a patient’s seclusion below that provided for in the Code of … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Special Hospital Trust, ex parte Munjaz; 10 Oct 2000
