Click the case name for better results:

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 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

In Re L (By His Next Friend GE); Regina v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust, Ex Parte L: HL 25 Jun 1998

The applicant was an adult autistic, unable to consent to medical treatment. Treatment was provided at a day centre. He had been detained informally under the Act and against the wishes of his carers, but the Court of Appeal decided he should have been formally detained. Held: The appeal succeeded. His detention had not been … Continue reading In Re L (By His Next Friend GE); Regina v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust, Ex Parte L: HL 25 Jun 1998

Regina (on the application of H) v Mental Health Review Tribunal, North and East London Region: CA 28 Mar 2001

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

Regina v Mental Health Act Commission ex parte Smith: Admn 11 May 1998

The Commission had power to hear a complaint about treatment since the power to detain also carried the power to treat, and a complaint about one part carried a power to complain about the rest. Citations: Times 18-May-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 524 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 120(b)(ii) Health, Jury Updated: 27 May … Continue reading Regina v Mental Health Act Commission ex parte Smith: Admn 11 May 1998

Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services NHS Trust and St Georges Healthcare NHS Trust ex parte S: Admn 7 May 1998

The authority obtained an ex parte order allowing it to give treatment in the form of a medically assisted birth, to the claimant against her will. Citations: Times 08-May-1998, Gazette 03-Jun-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 490 Links: Bailii Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Regina v Collins; Pathfinder … Continue reading Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services NHS Trust and St Georges Healthcare NHS Trust ex parte S: Admn 7 May 1998

Regina (C) v London South and West Region Mental Health Review Tribunal: CA 2001

A standardised period before a hearing to review a patient’s detention that does not vary with the facts of each case may involve a breach of the Convention right. Citations: [2001] EWCA Civ 1110, [2002] 1 WLR 176 Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights, Mental Health Act 1983 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited … Continue reading Regina (C) v London South and West Region Mental Health Review Tribunal: CA 2001

Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services NHS Trust and St George’s Health Care NHS Trust ex parte ‘S’: Admn 17 Mar 1997

The applicant sought to challenge a decision that she should be sterilised, and detained as a mental patient for this purpose. Judges: Popplewell J Citations: [1997] EWHC Admin 281 Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 2, Supreme Court Act 1981 31(6) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services … Continue reading Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services NHS Trust and St George’s Health Care NHS Trust ex parte ‘S’: Admn 17 Mar 1997

Ex parte Waldron: CA 1986

The court was asked whether section 139 precluded a mental patient from applying for leave to move for judicial review. Held: A restriction on the bringing of civil or criminal proceedings imposed by the section 139 did not apply to proceedings for judicial review. Ackner LJ concluded that Parliament had not intended to bar the … Continue reading Ex parte Waldron: CA 1986

Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005

The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act. Held: The House allowed the Hospital’s appeal. The policy was lawful. Seclusion was to be seen as … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005

Regina v Cannons Park Mental Health Review Tribunal, Ex Parte A: QBD 24 Aug 1993

It was unlawful to detain a psychopath for treatment where in fact his condition was untreatable. Citations: Times 24-Aug-1993, Independent 01-Sep-1993 Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 3(2) Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v Cannons Park Mental Health Review Tribunal, Ex Parte A CA 2-Mar-1994 It was not unlawful for a patient to be detained … Continue reading Regina v Cannons Park Mental Health Review Tribunal, Ex Parte A: QBD 24 Aug 1993

Axon, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another: Admn 23 Jan 2006

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

Khera v Secretary of State for The Home Department; Khawaja v Secretary of State for The Home Department: HL 10 Feb 1983

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

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Mental Health Review Tribunal for Mersey Regional Health Authority: Admn 1986

the interpretation of section 73(2) (and section 42(2)) may depend, in part at least, on what is meant by ‘discharge’. Held: Mann J said that it meant ‘discharge from hospital’, so that a condition could not be imposed that the patient reside in another hospital, even if not under conditions of detention. Mann J [1986] … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v Mental Health Review Tribunal for Mersey Regional Health Authority: Admn 1986

Acts

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

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Xuereb: QBD 14 Jun 2000

The fact that an alien was detained under the Mental Health Acts did not mean that he could not be ordered to be removed and returned to his own country. The power given to the Secretary of State was discretionary, and though the treatment he might receive was of a lower standard, it was not … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Xuereb: QBD 14 Jun 2000

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte X: CA 22 Feb 2001

The applicant had entered the UK without leave, and then been detained for mental illness. The Secretary ordered him to be removed. He claimed that there was no power to remove him whilst the detention order was current, and that the order infringed his human rights. Held: The later Act had not revoked the earlier, … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte X: CA 22 Feb 2001

Regina on the Application of Brooks v The Parole Board: CA 10 Feb 2004

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

A, Regina (on the Application of) v Harrow Crown Court and others: Admn 14 Aug 2003

The applicant sought his release from detention in hospital, correction of records at the Crown Court, and confirmation that his detention had infringed his human rights. He had been accused of two assaults, but was found unfit to plead under section 4 by a jury. He was however later made subject to the s37 order. … Continue reading A, Regina (on the Application of) v Harrow Crown Court and others: Admn 14 Aug 2003

B, Regina (on the Application of) v Ashworth Hospital Authority: CA 15 Apr 2003

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

Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice and Another: CA 1 May 2014

The Court was asked significant questions as to the procedure to be followed when a person is recalled by the Secretary of State to be detained in a hospital under the power conferred by section 42(3) of the Mental Health Act 1983. The Appellant contends that his recall was effected unlawfully, and that his subsequent … Continue reading Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice and Another: CA 1 May 2014

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Harry: QBD 3 Jun 1998

The Home Secretary had the duty to make a decision on the release of a mental patient, and in doing so had no obligation to follow the recommendation of the tribunal, but he must still act fairly and disclose what was happening in the making of his decision. Citations: Gazette 03-Jun-1998 Statutes: Mental Health Review … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Harry: QBD 3 Jun 1998

X v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 7 Dec 2000

The applicant applied for asylum, but suffered from schizophrenia. He had been refused entry and detained, and then his detention was transferred to a mental hospital by order of the Home Secretary, with a view to his return for treatment in Malta. The applicant alleged that the Secretary had no power to so order without … Continue reading X v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 7 Dec 2000

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Harry: QBD 15 May 1998

Home Secretary had the duty to make decision on release of mental patient and had no duty to follow recommendation of the tribunal but must act fairly and disclose what was happening. Citations: Times 15-May-1998 Statutes: Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983 (1983 No 942) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Harry: QBD 15 May 1998

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte X: CA 9 Jan 2001

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

Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947

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

Gray v Thames Trains and Others: HL 17 Jun 2009

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

Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen: SC 18 Feb 2016

Joint Enterprise Murder (and in Privy Council) The two defendants appealed against their convictions (one in Jamaica) for murder, under the law of joint enterprise. Each had been an accessory when their accomplice killed a victim with a knife. The judge in Jogee had directed the jury that he would be guilty of murder as … Continue reading Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen: SC 18 Feb 2016

Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

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

Osman v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 Oct 1998

Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide (Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, which the police investigated and in respect … Continue reading Osman v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 Oct 1998

Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission: HL 15 Dec 2005

The claimant appealed after her claim for sex discrimination had failed. She had been dismissed from her position an associate minister of the church. The court had found that it had no jurisdiction, saying that her appointment was not an employment. However the jurisdiction in sex discrimination cases was wider, extending to those who ‘contract … Continue reading Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission: HL 15 Dec 2005

Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office: HL 24 Jul 1991

The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to authorise the segregation of a prisoner on his arrival at another prison to … Continue reading Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office: HL 24 Jul 1991

PS, Regina (on the Application of) v Responsible Medical Officer, Dr G and others: Admn 10 Oct 2003

The claimant had been compulsorily detained under the Act. He complained that the detention and compulsory medication infringed his rights, and amongst other things breached his religious beliefs. Held: This was an exceptional case requiring attendance of the doctors to allow the testing of their evidence. The administration of anti-psychotic medication to PS would not … Continue reading PS, Regina (on the Application of) v Responsible Medical Officer, Dr G and others: Admn 10 Oct 2003

Anns and Others v Merton London Borough Council: HL 12 May 1977

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

Stovin v Wise, Norfolk County Council (Third Party): HL 24 Jul 1996

Statutory Duty Does Not Create Common Law Duty The mere existence of statutory power to remedy a defect cannot of itself create a duty of care to do so. A highway authority need not have a duty of care to highway users because of its duty to maintain the highway. The two stage test ‘involves … Continue reading Stovin v Wise, Norfolk County Council (Third Party): HL 24 Jul 1996

RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 22 Oct 2008

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

Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden: ECHR 23 Sep 1982

Balance of Interests in peaceful enjoyment claim (Plenary Court) The claimants challenged orders expropriating their properties for redevelopment, and the banning of construction pending redevelopment. The orders remained in place for many years. Held: Article 1 comprises three distinct rules: the first rule, set out in the first sentence of the first paragraph, is general … Continue reading Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden: ECHR 23 Sep 1982

AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Ashley and Another v Sussex Police: CA 27 Jul 2006

The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and misfeasance. The judge below had accepted that the officer had acted in self-defence, and entered … Continue reading Ashley and Another v Sussex Police: CA 27 Jul 2006

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

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

AK, (A Child), Regina (on The Application of) v The London Borough of Islington and Another: Admn 16 Feb 2021

Claim by AK against the London Borough of Islington (Children Services Department) and the North Central London Clinical Commissioning Group alleging that the defendants failed to adequately assess and plan for her needs following her discharge from hospital pursuant to s.117 of the Mental Health Act 1983 His Honour Judge Lickley QC Sitting as a … Continue reading AK, (A Child), Regina (on The Application of) v The London Borough of Islington and Another: Admn 16 Feb 2021

Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: CA 19 May 2005

Mr Seal noisily objected to a neighbour blocking in his car. Police were called who took him into custody under the 1983 Act. He was released several days later, and eventually sought damages for his wrongful treatment. He had failed to first seek permission from the court as was required by s139(2). Held: The appeal … Continue reading Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: CA 19 May 2005

Henderson v Wilcox and Others: ChD 3 Dec 2015

The claimant had been convicted of the manslaughter of his mother, and sentenced to be detained for treatment in a mental health hospital. It was thought unlikely he would ever be fit to be released. He would otherwise have inherited under her will. He now sought disapplication of the rule under the 1982 Act. Held: … Continue reading Henderson v Wilcox and Others: ChD 3 Dec 2015

Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

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

Regina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd: HL 16 May 2002

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

MM v WL Clinic and Another: UTAA 23 Nov 2015

Mental Health : All – whether for the purposes of Article 5 a restricted patient who has the capacity to do so can give a valid consent to the terms of a conditional discharge that, when it is implemented, will on an objective assessment create a deprivation of the patient’s liberty. Held: there was power … Continue reading MM v WL Clinic and Another: UTAA 23 Nov 2015

Secretary of State for Justice v MM: SC 28 Nov 2018

The respondent had been detained after conviction for arson, under the 1983 Act, and was liable to indefinite detention in hospital for medical treatment and dischargeable only by the Appellant or the First Tier Tribunal, possibly only as a conditional release. He said that that was discriminatory. Held: (Lord Hughes dissenting) The appeal failed. The … Continue reading Secretary of State for Justice v MM: SC 28 Nov 2018

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 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

Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

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

Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (MIND intervening): HL 10 Dec 2008

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

B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary: QBD 5 Apr 2000

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

T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd. and Another v Office of Communications: CA 12 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

Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark: CA 16 Oct 2003

The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the claimant? Held: A finding that a Convention right has been infringed, including a … Continue reading Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark: CA 16 Oct 2003

TW v London Borough of Enfield and Another: QBD 8 May 2013

The claimant sought damages after being detained under the 1983 Act, and a declaration that the section used was incompatible with her human rights. Held: The test for allowing proceedings was set at a low level, and even if section 139 does have any effect on the Applicant’s rights under Article 6 read together with … Continue reading TW v London Borough of Enfield and Another: QBD 8 May 2013

Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011

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

Futter and Another v Futter and Others: ChD 11 Mar 2010

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

Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: HL 4 Jul 2007

The claimant had sought to bring proceedings against the respondent, but as a mental patient subject to the 1983 Act, had been obliged by the section first to obtain consent. The parties disputed whether the failure was a procedural or substantial failing and whether it made the proceedings a nullity. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. … Continue reading Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: HL 4 Jul 2007

Meek v City of Birmingham District Council: CA 18 Feb 1987

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

Regina v Ashworth Special Hospital Trust, ex parte Munjaz; 10 Oct 2000

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