Category: Health

Rogers, Regina (on the Application of) v Swindon NHS Primary Care Trust: CA 12 Apr 2006

The claimant challenged the policy of her local health authority not to allow prescription to her of the drug Herceptin.
Held: The policy had not been settled upon lawfully and was to be set aside. On the one hand the PCT developed a policy which treated financial considerations as irrelevant, but at the same time its policy is to refuse funding save where exceptional personal or clinical circumstances can be shown. There was no evidence that one woman in a group who might benefit might have a greater clinical need than another, and ‘there is no rational basis for distinguishing between patients within the eligible group on the basis of exceptional clinical circumstances any more than on the basis of personal, let alone social, circumstances.’ Where fundamental rights are involved the court must subject the decision to rigorous scrutiny.
The court interpreted the decision in North West Lancashire: ‘a policy of withholding assistance save in unstated exceptional circumstances . . will be rational in the legal sense provided that it is possible to envisage and the decision-maker does envisage, what such exceptional circumstances might be. If it is not possible to envisage any such circumstances then the policy will be in practice a complete refusal of assistance: and irrational as such because it is sought to be justified not as a complete refusal but as a policy of exceptionality.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Buxton, Lord Justice Brooke, Sir Anthony Clarke MR

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 392, [2006] 1 WLR 2649

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Health Act 1977 16A, National Health Service (Functions of Strategic Health Authorities and Primary Care Trust etc) Regulations 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In Re Findlay, in re Hogben HL 1985
A public authority, and the Prison Service in particular, is free, within the limits of rationality, to decide on any policy as to how to exercise its discretions; it is entitled to change its policy from time to time for the future, and a person . .
Interpreted – North West Lancashire Health Authority v A D and G CA 29-Jul-1999
A decision not to fund gender re-assignment surgery was operated as a blanket policy without proper regard for individual cases and so was unlawful as an effective fetter on the discretion which the Health Authority was obliged to exercise. A lawful . .
Cited – Regina v Warwickshire County Council, Ex parte Collymore 1995
The court questioned the over rigid application of a policy in a decision by the respondent. . .
Cited – Regina v North Derbyshire Health Authority ex parte Kenneth Graeme Fisher Admn 11-Jul-1997
The court considered the duty of the authority to take account of guidance issued by the Secretary of State: ‘If the circular provided no more than guidance, albeit in strong terms, then the only duty placed upon health authorities was to take it . .
Cited – Regina v Ministry of Defence Ex Parte Smith and Others QBD 7-Jun-1995
An MOD ban on employing homosexuals was not Wednesbury unreasonable, even though it might be out of date. Pannick (counsel for the applicant, approved): ‘The court may not interfere with the exercise of an administrative discretion on substantive . .
Cited – Regina v Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Committee Ex Parte B CA 10-Mar-1995
A decision by a Health Authority to withhold treatment for a patient could be properly so made. It was not ordinarily to be a matter for lawyers. A Health Authority’s withholding of treatment, which might not be in a child’s simple best interests . .

Cited by:

Cited – A v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 12-Apr-2006
Each claimant sought damages for a criminal assault for which the defendant was said to be responsible. Each claim was to be out of the six year limitation period. In the first claim, the proposed defendant had since won a substantial sum from the . .
Cited – AC v Berkshire West Primary Care Trust, Equality and Human Rights Commissions intervening Admn 25-May-2010
The claimant, a male to female transsexual, challenged a decision by the respondent to refuse breast augmentation treatment. The Trust had a policy ‘GRS is a Low Priority treatment due to the limited evidence of clinical effectiveness and is not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Administrative

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240360

AH v West London MHT (J): UTAA 17 Feb 2011

Order for public hearing of detention review under Mental Health Act – at request of AH.

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 74 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – AH v West London MHT UTAA 29-Jul-2010
Prisoner in secure hospital – application for public hearig of request for discharge – refused . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jan-2016
The applicant was a convicted murderer who had been held in a high security mental hospital. His application for unescorted leave had been refused, and he wished to challenge the decisions. Anonymity in the subsequent proceedings had been refused to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.433482

A and D v B and E: FD 13 Jun 2003

In two separate actions, fathers with parental responsibility sought orders requiring the mothers of their children to ensure they received the MMR vaccine. Each mother objected, having suspicions as to the safety of the treatment. Specific issue orders were sought.
Held: The court found the evidence given by the expert for the mother’s unconvincing. There was no evidence of a medical reason for the children not to be immunised. Though part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules did not apply directly in family proceedings, experts should follow the principles laid down. The interests of the child were paramount, and the decision made according to their best interests. immunisation is in these children’s best interests. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights giving respect to private and family life is considered. There is an exception permitting the interference by the court for the protection of health.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Sumner

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1376 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 1 8, Civil Procedure Rules P35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Re R (A Minor) (Expert’s Evidence) FD 1991
The court gave guidance on the principles to be followed by experts providing evidence in children cases. . .
Cited – In Re AB (A Minor) (Medical Issues: Expert Evidence) FD 17-Aug-1994
An expert witness in child abuse cases was to explain all aspects of any controversial theory. . .
Cited – S v McC; W v W HL 1972
The distinction between the court’s ‘custodial’ and ‘protective’ jurisdictions was recognised. The case concerned the ordering of blood tests with a view to determining the paternity of a child involved in divorce proceedings. This was not a matter . .
Cited – In Re T (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) CA 24-Oct-1996
A baby boy who was 18 months old, suffered from a life-threatening liver defect. His parents were health-care professionals experienced in the care of sick children. The unanimous medical view was that as soon as donor liver became available the . .
Cited – In Re C (A Child) (HIV Test) FD 14-Sep-1999
The parents of a baby born to a HIV positive mother were strongly opposed to the testing of the child for HIV and to any form of medical intervention.
Held: There is a presumption that the united view of the parents of a child as to the . .
Cited – Re: L (Contact: Genuine Fear) FD 2002
The Court had to consider a mother’s total opposition to any contact between a child and his father. It was compelled to reach a decision with reluctance that the mother’s phobic disorder, not based on rational thinking, nevertheless was of such . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Health, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.185473

Wyatt and Another v Portsmouth Hospital NHS and Another: CA 12 Oct 2005

The appellants’ daughter had been born with very severe disabilities. Her doctors obtained an order allowing them a discretion not to ventilate her to keep her alive if necessary. She had improved, but the family now sought leave to appeal an order continuing the discretion.
Held: ‘we came to the clear conclusion that the judge had approached the best interests question correctly, and that permission to appeal against his decision in principle to make the declarations should be refused. We have taken some considerable time over this part of the case because we think it important that in cases of this sensitivity and difficulty, the guidelines which the experienced judges of the Family Division have to follow should be both as clear and as simple as is consistent with the serious issues which they engage.
It is nearly always a matter of regret when the debate relating to the treatment of a seriously disabled or sick child, which frequently involves issues of life and death, needs to be conducted in a courtroom, rather than a hospital or a consulting room. Where that happens, however, the forensic debate should, in our judgment, be unfettered by any potentially contentious glosses on the best interests test which are likely either inappropriately to shift the focus of the debate, or to restrict the broad exercise of the judicial discretion involved in balancing the multifarious factors in the case.
In our judgment, the intellectual milestones for the judge in a case such as the present are, therefore, simple, although the ultimate decision will frequently be extremely difficult. The judge must decide what is in the child’s best interests. In making that decision, the welfare of the child is paramount, and the judge must look at the question from the assumed point of view of the patient (Re J). There is a strong presumption in favour of a course of action which will prolong life, but that presumption is not irrebuttable (Re J). The term ‘best interests’ encompasses medical, emotional, and all other welfare issues (Re A). The court must conduct a balancing exercise in which all the relevant factors are weighed (Re J) and a helpful way of undertaking this exercise is to draw up a balance sheet (Re A). ‘

Judges:

Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Lloyd Lord Justice Wall

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1181, [2005] 1 WLR 3995

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Wyatt v Portsmouth NHS Trust and Another FD 21-Apr-2005
Charlotte Wyatt had been born very premature and so severely disabled that her doctors sought and obtained an order that she should not be revived if she died. She had survived several months longer than expected and her parents had noticed . .
Cited – Regina v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust ex parte Glass Admn 22-Apr-1999
Application with regard to continuation or otherwise of life saving treatment for a child. . .
Cited – Burke, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council and others (Official Solicitor and others intervening) CA 28-Jul-2005
The claimant suffered a congenital degenerative brain condition inevitably resulting in a future need to receive nutrition and hydration by artificial means. He was concerned that a decision might be taken by medical practitioners responsible for . .
Cited – Re L (a child) (Medical Treatment: Benefit) FD 1-Nov-2004
(Date) . .
Cited – Glass v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Mar-2004
The applicant’s adult son was disabled. There was a disagreement with the hospital about his care. The hospital considered that to alleviate his distress, he should not be resuscitated. The family wanted to take him home, fearing euthanasia. The . .
Cited – Portsmouth NHS Trust v Wyatt and others FD 7-Oct-2004
Charlotte Wyatt was born prematurely, and depended for day to day her life on medical support. Her doctors asked to be permitted not to resuscitate her again if she needed it. Her parents asked that she be given whatever chance was available for her . .
Cited – Regina (Burke) v General Medical Council Admn 30-Jul-2004
The applicant, suffering a life threatening disease, wanted to ensure his continued treatment and revival in the circumstance of losing his own capacity. He said the respondent’s guidelines for doctors were discriminatory and failed to protect his . .
Cited – In Re B (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) CA 1981
The child was born with Down’s Syndrome and an intestinal blockage. She needed the obstruction to be relieved if she was to survive. If the operation were performed, the child might die within a few months but it was probable that her life . .
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
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 . .
Cited – Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Department of Health and Social Security HL 17-Oct-1985
Lawfulness of Contraceptive advice for Girls
The claimant had young daughters. She challenged advice given to doctors by the second respondent allowing them to give contraceptive advice to girls under 16, and the right of the first defendant to act upon that advice. She objected that the . .
Cited – W Healthcare NHS Trust v KH and Others CA 17-Sep-2004
The patient was very severely disabled. She was a lady of 59 suffering from multiple sclerosis. She was not competent to make decisions about her own treatment. She was in a pitiful state, and had to be fed through a percutaneous gastronomy tube but . .

Cited by:

See Also – D and D W v Portsmouth Hospital NHS; in re W (A Child) CA 3-May-2006
The claimants had sought court orders against the hospital to secure continuing life-supporting treatment for their daughter who had been born very severely disabled. The Trust now sought their costs from the various actions.
Held: The parents . .
See Also – In re Wyatt FD 23-Feb-2006
. .
Cited – Re OT (A Child) CA 14-May-2009
Parents sought leave to challenge a decision made on the request of their child’s doctors to discontinue treatment to avoid a more painful but inevitable death. The parents alleged a defect in the procedure applied by the hospital.
Held: . .
Cited – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James and Others CA 1-Mar-2013
The patient had been found to lack capacity to litigate and make decisions as to his medical treatment. The Hospital appealed against rejection of its request for a declaration that it would be lawful to withhold treatment in the case of clinical . .
Cited – Great Ormond Street Hospital v Yates and Others FD 11-Apr-2017
Baby Gard suffered an overwhelming and life threating condition. The Hospital considered that his welfare wa sbest served by withdrawal of life support. His parents could not agree. The Hospital now sought a declaration from the court as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231063

Kolanis v The United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Jun 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – No violation of Art. 5-1-e; Violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of Art. 5-5; No separate issue under Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.
The complainant had been subject to detention in a mental hospital. She now complained that there had been a twelve month delay between a decision that she should be released subject to conditions, and the fulfillment of those conditions and her release.
Held: The delay was unreasonable, and since the law provided no means of compensation, a breach had occurred of her article 5.5 rights. It could not be excluded that the applicant would have been released earlier from detention in a psychiatric hospital if the procedures had been in conformity with article 5(4). The delay had been of about 12 months. The award was 6000Eur.

Citations:

517/02, (2006) 42 EHRR 2, Times 28-Jul-2005, [2005] ECHR 411

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health, Damages

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227204

In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental Rights); In re F (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights): FD 13 Jun 2003

In each case fathers not married to the mother of the child, but with parental responsibility sought to have the child immunised. The mothers opposed the treatment saying they believed it unsafe.
Held: The children should be immunised. Article 8.2 permitted interference with family life for health reasons. Mothers and fathers had equal rights before the court, and the court should be reluctant to intervene. The medical evidence was clear and persuasive. Acknowledging the mothers fears, age appropriate vaccination was in the child’s best interests. This was not a general approval of immunisation for children.

Judges:

Sumner J

Citations:

Times 26-Jun-2003, Gazette 14-Aug-2003

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 8, European Convention on Human Rights 8.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights); In re F (a Child) (Imminisation: Parental rights) CA 30-Jul-2003
In two actions heard together, single mothers resisted attempts to have their children immunised at the behest of the fathers, who in each case had parental responsibility.
Held: A one-parent carer did not have the freedom to make such a . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights); In re F (a Child) (Imminisation: Parental rights) CA 30-Jul-2003
In two actions heard together, single mothers resisted attempts to have their children immunised at the behest of the fathers, who in each case had parental responsibility.
Held: A one-parent carer did not have the freedom to make such a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.184024

Dewar v Dewar: HL 25 Jun 1891

Incapacity – Partial Insanity – Curator Bonis – Appointment on Petition – Opposition of Alleged Lunatic – Necessity of Cognition – No Absolute Title to Cognition.
In a petition at the instance of a wife for the appointment of a curator bonis to her husband, who was a medical man of considerable property, and at the time was confined in an asylum under warrant of the sheriff, it was proved by medical certificates that the husband had a clear and intelligent comprehension of business matters, and in particular of his own financial affairs, but that he suffered from delusions with regard to spiritualism, and entertained groundless feelings of mistrust regarding members of his own family, which might affect the propriety of his directions respecting the management of his own property.
Held ( aff. the decision of the First Division) (1) that the Court of Session had jurisdiction to entertain the petition; (2) that in spite of opposition, the Court had discretion to determine the nature of the inquiry to be made; and (3) that the certificates produced were sufficient to justify the Court in appointing a curator bonis.

Judges:

Lords Herschell, Watson, and Morris

Citations:

[1891] UKHL 917, 28 SLR 917

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Health

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.636775

M, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham and Another: Admn 3 Mar 2010

‘ This case concerns which local authority is responsible for meeting the accommodation costs of an individual detained under section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 who is then discharged back into the community.’

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 562 (Admin), (2010) 13 CCL Rep 217, [2010] BLGR 678, (2010) 116 BMLR 46, [2010] MHLR 110

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Local Government

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.421221

Lewis v Gibson and Another: CA 19 May 2005

Appeal against order displacing applicant as best friend of mental health patient.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 587

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 829

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – MH v Secretary of State for the Department of Health and others HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant, detained for assessment under section 2, was too disabled to make an application to the court on her own behalf. After a dispute between her mother and the medical officer over her treatment, an application was made to the county . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225284

Plinio Galfetti v Regina: CACD 31 Jul 2002

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 also applied to the Mental Health review Tribunal, who had mistakenly decided that there was no longer any need to hold him. The psychiatrists disagreed. He argued that he was now held unlawfully, and in breach of his human rights because of the substantial delay.
Held: Section 38 is to be used to hold a patient for assessment, not to hold him until a place could be found. The Court of Criminal Appeal had to act within its powers under the 1968 Act, but these included the power to make a hospital order. The nature of the earlier orders to delay sentence by the Crown Court were not capable of being appealed. There had been an excessive delay. However the delay affected both defendant and complainant, and the defendant could not simply say that the case could not proceed because of the infringement of his rights. The judge’s order was in accordance with the evidence before him and was correct.

Judges:

Lord Justice May

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 1916

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 37, European Convention on Human Rights Art 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001) CACD 12-Jul-2001
When assessing whether the defendant’s right to a trial within a reasonable time had been infringed, the court should look as from the date at which he was charged, or served with a summons, and not from the date of the first interview. Although a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.174451

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. An action begun without the prior leave of the High Court was a complete nullity.
Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘the words first introduced in section 16(2) of the 1930 Act (‘No proceedings, civil or criminal, shall be brought’) appear to be clear in their effect and have always been thought to be so. They were introduced with the obvious object of giving mental health professionals greater protection than they had enjoyed before. They were re-enacted with knowledge of the effect the courts had given to them. ‘ (Lord Woolf and Baroness Hale dissenting)
Baroness Hale of Richmond (dissenting) said: ‘I approach the task of construing section 139(2), therefore, on the basis that Parliament, by enacting the procedural requirement to obtain leave, did not intend the result to be that a claimant might be deprived of access to the courts, unless there is express language or necessary implication to the contrary. If there is no express language, there will be no necessary implication unless the legislative purpose cannot be achieved in any other way. Procedural requirements are there to serve the ends of justice, not to defeat them. It does not serve the ends of justice for a claimant to be deprived of a meritorious claim because of a procedural failure which does no substantial injustice to the defendant.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Woolf, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

Times 05-Jul-2007, [2007] UKHL 31, [2007] 4 All ER 177, [2007] 1 WLR 1910

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 139

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Rendall v Blair 1890
Where a statute requires leave to commence proceedings to be granted, a failure to obtain such consent does not automatically render the proceedings a nullity.
Bowen LJ said: ‘this section is not framed in the way in which sections are framed . .
Appeal from – 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex Parte Jeyeanthan Admn 3-Apr-1998
An appeal by the Home Secretary against a ruling that he had to use the same prescribed form as would be used by the asylum seeker. The use of a letter which omitted a substantial and important declaration was invalid. Lord Woolf MR made plain the . .
Cited – In re Saunders (A Bankrupt) ChD 1997
Very emphatic language was required in a statute before want of leave should, without more, result in proceedings being treated as a nullity. Leave could in appropriate circumstances be granted after the event notwithstanding the proceedings had . .
Cited – Pyx Granite Ltd v Ministry of Housing and Local Government HL 1959
There is a strong presumption that Parliament will not legislate to prevent individuals affected by legal measures promulgated by executive public bodies having a fair opportunity to challenge these measures and to vindicate their rights in court . .
Cited – Regina v Angel CACD 1968
The failure to obtain the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions to a prosecution under section 8 of the Sexual Offences Act 1967 rendered the whole of the trial, including the committal proceedings, a complete nullity. . .
Cited – Horton v Sadler and Another HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimant had been injured in a road traffic accident for which the defendant was responsible in negligence. The defendant was not insured, and so a claim was to be made against the MIB. The plaintiff issued proceedings just before the expiry of . .
Cited – Bradford Corporation v Myers HL 1916
The 1893 Act was criticised for its complexity. A section gave protection to public authorities for ‘any act done in pursuance, or execution, or intended execution of any Act of Parliament, or of any power duty or authority, or in respect of any . .
Cited – Magor and St Mellons Rural District Council v Newport Corporaion HL 1951
The Court of Appeal had tried to fill in the gaps in a statute where parliament had intended an effect.
Held: Rights to compensation are well capable of falling within the definition of ‘property of a company’ in the relevant provisions of the . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Warn HL 1970
A courts martial prosecution begun without the necessary prior consent, the proceedings were a nullity. . .
Cited – Golder v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1975
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 . .
Cited – Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd CA 1978
The plaintiff appealed the strict application of the limitation laws against his claim. He had been injured whilst working as a grinder. He began one claim which lapsed, and began a second claim outside the limitation period, requesting the court to . .
Cited – London and Clydeside Estates v Aberdeen District Council HL 8-Nov-1979
Identifying ‘maandatory’ and ‘regulatory’
The appellants had sought a Certificate of Alternative Development. The certificate provided was defective in that it did not notify the appellants, as required, of their right to appeal. Their appeal out of time was refused.
Held: The House . .
Cited – Regina v Pearce CACD 1980
The lack of a required consent by the Attorney General, under section 4(3) of the 1977 Act led to the quashing of the conviction. . .
Cited – Ashingdane v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-1985
The right of access to the courts is not absolute but may be subject to limitations. These are permitted by implication since the right of access ‘by its very nature calls for regulation by the State, regulation which may vary in time and place . .
Cited – Regina v Soneji and Bullen HL 21-Jul-2005
The defendants had had confiscation orders made against them. They had appealed on the basis that the orders were made more than six months after sentence. The prosecutor now appealed saying that the fact that the order were not timely did not . .
Cited – Stubbings and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 22-Oct-1996
There was no human rights breach where the victims of sex abuse had been refused a right to sue for damages out of time. The question is whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justify a different treatment in law: . .
Cited – M v United Kingdom ECHR 1987
The protection of those responsible for the care of mental patients from being harassed by litigation is a legitimate objective. . .
Cited – Winch v Jones CA 1986
The court asked as to the criteria which should be applied when considering an application by a mental patient for leave to bring proceedings under section 139: ‘section 139 protects the defendant unless and until the applicant obtains leave. This . .

Cited by:

Cited – In re F (A Child) (Placement Order); C v East Sussex County Council (Adoption) CA 1-May-2008
The father sought to revoke a freeing order. He said that the social workers had conspired to exclude him from the process. The child was born of a casual relationship, and at first he was unaware of the proceedings. On learning of them he sought to . .
Cited – Adorian v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 23-Jan-2009
The claimant received injuries when arrested. He was later convicted of resisting arrest. The defendant relied on section 329 of the 2003 Act. The claimant said that the force used against him was grossly disproportionate. The commissioner appealed . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Park v Cho and Others ChD 24-Jan-2014
The parties disputed the chairmanship of a charity. The claimant succeeded, but a third party later intervened saying that permission had not first been obtained from the Charity Commission as required. The defendant now appealed against the lifting . .
Cited – Lalchan, Regina v CACD 27-May-2022
Conviction withoiut required Consent was Unsafe
Whether a conviction for an offence which requires the consent of the Attorney General before the proceedings are instituted can stand when no such consent was obtained.
Held: The appellant’s arguments were well-founded and his conviction on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Police

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.254551

Quintavalle v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority: HL 28 Apr 2005

The parents of a boy suffering a serious genetic disorder sought IVF treament in which any embryo would be tested for its pre-implantation genetic status. Only an embryo capable of producing the stem cells necessary to cure the boy would be implanted. The claimant said that the Authority had no power to license such a procedure since it would not count as treatment of the mother within the Act.
Held: The Act required only that the procedures undertaken should be in the course of treating the mother. Such overall treatment would include many procedures not directly affecting her. This procedure would therefore be treatment in the context of the treament of the mother. ”Suitable’ is one of those adjectives which leaves its content to be determined entirely by context.’ The Warnock report from which the Act followed allowed explicitly that procedures would develop, and for example that sex selection might come to be considered in future: ‘The authority should be specifically charged with the responsibility to regulate and monitor practice in relation to those sensitive areas which raise fundamental ethical questions.’ It was therefore within the remit of the Authority to consider and therefore licence such procedures.

Judges:

Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2005] UKHL 28, Times 29-Apr-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 1061, [2005] 2 AC 561

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Quintavalle, Regina (on the Application of) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority CA 16-May-2003
A licence was sought so that a couple could have a child who would be tissue typed to establish his suitability to provide an umbilical cord after his birth to help treat his future brother. A licence had been granted subject to conditions, and the . .
Cited – Royal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom v Department of Health and Social Security HL 2-Jan-1981
The court was asked whether nurses could properly involve themselves in a pregnancy termination procedure not known when the Act was passed, and in particular, whether a pregnancy was ‘terminated by a medical practitioner’, when it was carried out . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance) HL 13-Mar-2003
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention
The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act.
Held: The challenge failed. The court was to . .
Cited – AHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .

Cited by:

Cited – In Re R (Parental responsibility: IVF baby); D (A Child), Re HL 12-May-2005
The parents had received IVF treatment together, but had separated before the child was born. The mother resisted an application by the father for a declaration of paternity.
Held: The father’s appeal failed. The Act made statutory provision . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank PlC and Others HL 31-Oct-2007
The House was asked whether the liability of a credit card company under the 1974 Act applied where the contract was performed abroad and subject to foreign law.
Held: The principle which disapplied an English statute in an extra-territorial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.224490

U v Centre for Reproductive Medicine: CA 24 Apr 2002

The claimant appealed a refusal to grant an order preventing the destruction of the sperm of her late husband held by the respondent fertility clinic. The clinic had persuaded her husband to sign a form of consent for this purpose. The claimant said that the form had been obtained by undue influence, believing that the treatment would not be provided unless it was signed. He had first completed the form to refuse such consent, but the staff had persuaded him to change it.
Held: A withdrawal of consent might be vitiated by undue influence. It was for the claimant to establish undue influence. However here, the issue is not strictly one of undue influence, but rather of a consent given within a particular statutory context. The court stressed the great importance to be attached to the prescribed form completed in compliance with Schedule 3 of the Act. The judge’s decision was essentially one of fact having heard and seen the witnesses. That decision was not to be disturbed.

Judges:

Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 565

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re T (Adult: Refusal of Treatment) CA 1992
A patient’s right to veto medical treatment is absolute: ‘This right of choice is not limited to decisions which others might regard as sensible. It exists notwithstanding that the reasons for making the choice are rational, irrational, unknown or . .
Cited – Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
Appeal from – The Centre for Reproductive Medicine v U FD 24-Jan-2002
The defendant sought to use the sperm of her deceased husband for her insemination. The deceased had apparently withdrawn his consent to the use of his sperm posthumously. His widow claimed that he had been influenced to change the form, by an . .

Cited by:

Cited – Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant challenged the decision of the court that the sperm donor who had fertilised her eggs to create embryos stored by the respondent IVF clinic, could withdraw his consent to their continued storage or use.
Held: The judge worked . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Undue Influence

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.170240

Regina and The Secretary of State for Health v Association of Pharmaceutical Importers and Dowelhurst Limited: CA 18 Dec 2001

The applicants sought to quash the Scheme in the 1999 Regulations by judicial review. Prescribers under the NHS are not directly concerned with price, and that led to the need for independent regulatory controls over prices. Those controls allowed modulation of the prices, so that companies could select how the overall required price reduction was apportioned between products. That modulation was challenged.
Held: It was not possible to sever the modulation provisions. There was no discriminatory effect against imports resulting from the Scheme. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

The Master Of The Rolls, Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Ward

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1896, [2002] UKCLR 305, [2002] Eu LR 197

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme 1999, Health Act 1999 33

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Parke, Davis and Co v Probel, Reese, Beintema-Interpharm and Centrafarm ECJ 29-Feb-1968
ECJ The restrictive nature of article 85(1) is incompatible with any extension of the prohibition for which it provides beyond the three categories of agreement exclusively enumerated therein. The existence of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Commercial

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.167219

Regina (DJ) v Mental Health Review Tribunal; Regina (AN) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region): Admn 11 Apr 2005

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 of proof above the civil standard of the balance of probabilities would undermine the purpose of the Act. The tribunal was ‘not so much engaged in finding facts but rather with a process of judgment and assessment, involving evaluation of inherently imprecise and often conflicting psychiatric evidence.’ The civil standard was appropriate as regards an issue as to a past fact. As to the evaluation of the future the tribunal could only ‘examine the case as a whole, attaching the appropriate weight to all relevant facts when coming to its conclusion.’

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

Times 18-Apr-2005, [2005] EWHC 587 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 37 72

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not applicable – Addington v Texas 30-Apr-1979
(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. . .
Distinguished – 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 . .
Distinguished – 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 . .
Distinguished – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rehman HL 11-Oct-2001
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 . .
Distinguished – Gough and Another v Chief Constable of Derbyshire CA 20-Mar-2002
The appellants challenged the legality under European law of orders under the Act restricting their freedom of movement, after suspicion of involvement in football violence.
Held: Although the proceedings under which orders were made were . .
Distinguished – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
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 . .
Cited – Hutchison Reid v Secretary Of State For Scotland and Another HL 5-Feb-1998
(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 . .
Cited – 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
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 . .
Cited – Regina (N) v Dr M and Others CA 6-Dec-2002
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 . .
Cited – Hutchison Reid v The United Kingdom ECHR 20-Feb-2003
The applicant had been detained over many years after committing offences of a sexual and violent nature. After one release he reoffended and was re-detained after completing his sentence. He challenged the basis of his continued detention.
Cited – Regina v Havering Magistrates Court, Ex Parte Director of Public Prosecutions; Regina v Wirral Borough Magistrates Court, Ex Parte Mckeown QBD 7-Feb-2001
A magistrate considering an allegation of breach of bail, need not take account only of evidence which was strictly admissible. The Magistrates must take proper account of the evidential quality of what was presented, but it was not a breach of the . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Regina (Sim) v Parole Board CA 18-Dec-2003
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 . .

Cited by:

Cited – McClean, Re HL 7-Jul-2005
The appellant was serving a life sentence for terrorist offences. He complained that he should have been released under the 1998 Act. It was said he would be a danger to the public if released. On pre-release home leave he was involved in a . .
Appeal from – AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others CA 21-Dec-2005
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.224236

E, Regina (on the Application of) v Bristol City Council: Admn 13 Jan 2005

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 in issue has clearly expressed the wish that her nearest relative is not to be involved in decisions about her case, and it appears to the AMHP that to contradict that wish may cause the patient distress to the extent of affecting her health, the AMHP is entitled to regard consultation with the nearest relative as not reasonably practicable.
Practicality under the 1983 Act should be approached on the basis that the patient’s interests are to be considered. A judgment has to be made, but it must always be borne in mind that one of the doctors who is concerned with recommending compulsory admission should have had previous acquaintance with the patient. Thus only if it is considered on reasonable grounds to be appropriate in given circumstances for doctors who have not had previous acquaintance to decide whether to recommend admission should such a course be adopted.
Bennett J said: ‘So in the Applicant’s case, prima facie, the approved social worker is obliged to inform the nearest relative under subsection (3) and consult with her under subsection (4). If such were to happen it would be against the Applicant’s express wishes and it could harm her health. Furthermore, in my judgment such contact with Mrs S would either be futile, as Mrs S would take no interest in the matter, or it might give Mrs S the opportunity to interfere even benevolently, as she might see it, in the life of the Applicant.
However, within both subsections (3) and (4) are the words ‘as are practicable’ and ‘not reasonably practicable’ respectively. Can these words be so legitimately interpreted so as to [relieve] the approved social worker, in the instant case, of having to inform, under subsection (3), and/or consult, under subsection (4), with Mrs S. In my judgment they can, for the reasons which I will now give.
Section 3(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 requires the court, in construing section 11 of the Mental Health Act, so far as possible, to interpret it in a way which is compatible with the Applicant’s rights under the European Convention. In my judgment that is perfectly possible. Indeed, even without that statutory imperative, ‘practicable’ and ‘reasonably practicable’ can be interpreted to include taking account of the Applicant’s wishes and/or her health and well-being.’

Judges:

Bennett J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 74 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 11(4), Human Rights Act 1998 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances CA 1973
The claimant sought to bring his claim under a provision which required a complaint to the industrial tribunal to be made within four weeks of the dismissal unless the employment tribunal was satisfied that this was not ‘practicable’. He did not . .

Cited by:

Cited – TTM v London Borough of Hackney and Others Admn 11-Jun-2010
The claimant had said that his detention under the 1983 Act was unlawful, and that the court should issue a writ of habeas corpus for his release. Having been released he sought damages on the basis that his human rights had been infringed. The . .
Cited – TTM v London Borough of Hackney and Others CA 14-Jan-2011
The claimant had been found to have been wrongfully detained under section 3. He appealed against rejection of his claim for judicial review and for damages. The court found that his detention was lawful until declared otherwise. He argued that the . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222721

B, Regina (on the Application of) v Dr SS and others: Admn 31 Jan 2005

The claimant was a mental patient detained for a bipolar dis-order after convictions for rape.

Judges:

Silber J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 86 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .

Cited by:

See Also – B v Responsible Medical Officer, Broadmoor Hospital, Dr SS and others Admn 8-Sep-2005
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 . .
See Also – B, Regina (on the Application Of) v SS (Responsible Medical Officer) and others CA 26-Jan-2006
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222027

NHS Trust v T (adult patient: refusal of medical treatment): FD 28 May 2004

The patient had a history of self harming leading to dangerously low haemoglobin levels. She knew that if she refused a blood transfusion she might die; nevertheless she believed that her blood was evil and that the healthy blood given her in a transfusion became contaminated and thus increased the volume of evil blood in her body and ‘likewise the danger of my committing acts of evil’.
Held: She was unable to use and weigh the relevant information, and thus the competing factors, in the process of arriving at her decision to refuse a transfusion.

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1279 (Fam), [2005] 1 All ER 387

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v C HL 30-Jul-2009
Consent to Sex Requires Capacity
The prosecution appealed against the reversal of the defendant’s conviction for a sexual assault of a woman said to be unable to communicate her refusal to sex because of her mental disorder.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and the conviction . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221041

In re D (J): ChD 1982

The patient, a widow had five children. After she became a mental inpatient the court was asked to draft a statutory will.
Held: The court emphasised the need to provide full details of the estate assets and family background. An order that a will should not be executed pending an appeal was wrong in principle. The court laid down the principles upon which it should act. A letter of offer was taken into account on the question of costs.

Judges:

Sir Robert Megarry VC

Citations:

[1982] 2 WLR 373, [1982] 2 All ER 37, [1982] Ch 237

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1959 100(4) 102(1) 103(1)(dd)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In Re the Estate of Marjorie Langdon Cameron (Deceased); Peter David Phillips v Donald Cameron and Others ChD 24-Mar-1999
One of the testatrix’s children was thought to be profligate, and had failed to maintain his own son. Acting under an enduring power of attorney, the testatrix’s attorneys made a substantial gift in establishing an educational trust for that son’s . .
Cited – Cutts v Head and Another CA 7-Dec-1983
There had been a trial of 35 days regarding rights of way over land, which had proved fruitless, and where some orders had been made without jurisdiction. The result had been inconclusive. The costs order was now appealed, the plaintiff complaining . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Health

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.194469

Amanda Claire Smith (A Patient proceeding by her Mother and Next Friend Jenny May Smith) v The Secretary of State for Health (Sued on behalf of the Committee on Safety of Medicines): QBD 15 Feb 2002

Mrs Smith’s daughter was unwell with chicken pox. She gave her aspirin, but she contracted a serious disease. She later learned that the Committee had been previously warned of the complication. The drug was later withdrawn for such cases.
Held: The statute avoided any liability for breach of statutory duty. Was the Secretary liable in negligence? No common law duty was owed in respect of the decisions allegedly negligent, even if there was fault in failing to stick to the original timetable. Such decisions are discretionary/policy and not justiciable. It was appropriate to withhold a warning until those who might implement it were ready. The delay of a month was not negligent.

Judges:

Justice Morland

Citations:

Times 11-Mar-2002

Statutes:

Medicines Act 1968 6(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Health, Negligence

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.167623

Regina v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust (ex parte Glass): CA 21 Jul 1999

The courts can not intervene between a parent and her child’s doctors to control future medical care of the child. Such decisions must be made as they presented themselves. In such cases the child’s best interests took precedence over strict legalistic procedures. The court has power to give appropriate remedies even though an incorrect procedures may have been followed. The general rule is that Declarations should be sought and considered in the light of circumstances as they are and not as they may be. Any departure from that approach would have to be justified.

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR

Citations:

Times 26-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1914, [1999] 2 FLR 905, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep Med 367, [1999] 3 FCR 145, (1999) 11 Admin LR 991, (1999) 50 BMLR 269, [1999] Fam Law 696

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust ex parte Glass Admn 22-Apr-1999
Application with regard to continuation or otherwise of life saving treatment for a child. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wyatt v Portsmouth NHS Trust and Another FD 21-Apr-2005
Charlotte Wyatt had been born very premature and so severely disabled that her doctors sought and obtained an order that she should not be revived if she died. She had survived several months longer than expected and her parents had noticed . .
Appeal from – Glass v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Mar-2004
The applicant’s adult son was disabled. There was a disagreement with the hospital about his care. The hospital considered that to alleviate his distress, he should not be resuscitated. The family wanted to take him home, fearing euthanasia. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Children

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.146829

Miah, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 22 Jul 2004

The prisoner had been sentenced but then transferred to a secure mental hospital. Whilst there be acted in a way equivalent to a hostage taking.
Held: Upon his release from the mental hospital the powers as to recall under the prison sentence remained intact, and he was properly returned to prison.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

Times 10-Sep-2004, [2004] EWHC 2569 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 47

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Prisons, Health

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219528

Ganatra, Regina (on the Application Of) v London Borough of Ealing and others: CA 18 Jul 2002

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; Ref: scu.217401

Spink, Regina (on the Application Of) v Wandsworth Borough Council: Admn 20 Oct 2004

Parents requested the local authority to make provision for their severely disabled children. The local authority wished when deciding whether to provide adaptations of the house to make allowance for the parents’ financial resources.
Held: The defendant authority is correct in its contention that it can lawfully have regard to parental resources when deciding under section 2 of the 1970 Act whether it is necessary for it to make arrangements to meet the claimant children’s needs. The three stages identified in ex p. Barry applied: (i) identification of needs, (ii) a decision on whether it is necessary for the authority to meet those needs, and (iii) if so, the resulting duty to make such arrangements.

Judges:

Richards J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2314 (Admin), Times 02-Nov-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 2, Housing, Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 819, Local Government and Housing Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Application for leave – Spink and Another, Regina (on the Application Of) v London Borough of Wandsworth Admn 15-Jul-2004
Application for leave to present petition for judicial review – granted . .
Cited – Regina v Powys County Council ex parte Hambridge CA 2-Jul-1998
Statutory extensions of the council’s duty to provide new kinds of care, did not take away the authority’s power to charge for services given under the original section. The council may charge for community care services in the home provided to . .
Cited – Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food HL 14-Feb-1968
Exercise of Ministerial Discretion
The Minister had power to direct an investigation in respect of any complaint as to the operation of any marketing scheme for agricultural produce. Milk producers complained about the price paid by the milk marketing board for their milk when . .
Cited – Fay, Regina (on the Application of) v Essex County Council Admn 26-Apr-2004
. .
Cited – AB X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) v East Sussex County Council and Another Admn 18-Feb-2003
The physical and psychological integrity which the state may in principle be under an obligation to take positive steps to protect under Article 8 included two particularly important concepts. The first was human dignity, the second was the right of . .
Cited – AB X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) v East Sussex County Council and Another Admn 18-Feb-2003
The physical and psychological integrity which the state may in principle be under an obligation to take positive steps to protect under Article 8 included two particularly important concepts. The first was human dignity, the second was the right of . .
Cited – Regina (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 29-Nov-2002
The League challenged the respondent’s statement in the Prisons’ Handbook that children held in young offender institutions were not subject to the protection of the 1989 Act.
Held: Neither the Prison Act and Rules excluded the Prison . .

Cited by:

Full Application – Spink and Another, Regina (on the Application Of) v London Borough of Wandsworth Admn 15-Jul-2004
Application for leave to present petition for judicial review – granted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Local Government

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.216578

G, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal: Admn 7 Oct 2004

The patient had a violent history. His eventual realease from a secure mental hospital was ordered, but the conditions imposed for his release could not be met. He argued that his continued detention infringed his human rights.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Collins

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2193 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215930

A Local Health Board v AB: CoP 30 Apr 2015

Application in relation to AB who is a young woman of 34 years old and who has a serious and life threatening cardiac condition, the recommended treatment for which is surgery. In addition to her physical problems, AB was an inpatient at a low secure private hospital under section 3 Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA). She has a mild/borderline learning disability which has been the case since her childhood years; a working diagnosis of autism which affects her anxiety levels, impulse control and mood regulation; a schizophrenic illness with prominent persecutory thinking. It is argued that the combination of the above factors in relation to her functioning leads to the conclusion that she lacks the capacity to litigate and to make a decision about her medical treatment.

Judges:

Isabel Parry HHJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCOP 31

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.546276

Article 39, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Education: CA 24 Nov 2020

Appeal against an order dismissing the appellant’s claim for judicial review by which it sought to challenge the Adoption and Children (Coronavirus) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 introduced by the Secretary of State for Education in response to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. The Amendment Regulations introduced a range of temporary amendments to ten statutory instruments governing the children’s social care system.
Held: The Secretary of State had been under an obligation to consult several interested parties and bodies. The amendments had substantial effects. He had failed to satisfy this requirement, but the regulations having now expired, a declaration only was sufficient.

Citations:

[2020] EWCA Civ 1577

Links:

Bailii, Judiciary Summary, Judiciary

Statutes:

Adoption and Children (Coronavirus) (Amendment) Regulations 2020

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Adoption, Children, Administrative

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.656304

N v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 5 May 2005

The applicant had sought asylum here, but her application was rejected. She was suffering advanced HIV/AIDS. With continued proper treatment she would survive several years. If returned to Uganda she would not receive that treatment and would not survice as long.
Held: The issue was not as to her mistreatment in Uganda, but as to the lack of treatment there. It was not a breach of her article rights to be returned. If she had been a special case, the humanitarian reasons for not ordering a return might be overwhelming, but her case was far from unique. The cases were not clear. The ECHR had itself sought to distinguish its own decision in D -v- UK. The fundamental was that article 3 did not require signatory states to admit and treat Aids sufferers from all over the world and to provide them with treatment for life. Nor should the humane treatment of an asylum applicant whilst his application is determined put him in a better position than someone who had not managed to reach these shores.
Baroness Hale said: ‘In my view, therefore, the test, in this sort of case, is whether the applicant’s illness has reached such a critical stage (i.e. he is dying) that it would be inhuman treatment to deprive him of the care which he is currently receiving and send him home to an early death unless there is care available there to enable him to meet that fate with dignity. This is to the same effect as the text prepared by my noble and learned friend, Lord Hope of Craighead. It sums up the facts in D. It is not met on the facts of this case.’

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2005] UKHL 31, [2005] 2 AC 296, [2005] 2 WLR 1124, [2005] INLR 388, (2005) 84 BMLR 126, [2005] 4 All ER 1017, [2005] HRLR 22, [2005] Imm AR 353, [2005] UKHRR 862

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – N v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 16-Oct-2003
The applicant had come to the UK to seek asylum, but had advanced HIV/AIDS. When her asylum claim failed she sought permission to continue her stay saying that if returned she would not receive proper treatment and would die. . .
Cited – D v United Kingdom ECHR 1997
In the circumstances of the case, where the applicant was in the advanced stage of a terminal illness (AIDS), to implement a decision by the respondent to remove the appellant to St Kitts in the West Indies would be a violation of his rights under . .
Cited – Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right . .
Cited – Bensaid v The United Kingdom ECHR 6-Feb-2001
The applicant was a schizophrenic and an illegal immigrant. He claimed that his removal to Algeria would deprive him of essential medical treatment and sever ties that he had developed in the UK that were important for his well-being. He claimed . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – N v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 16-Oct-2003
The applicant had come to the UK to seek asylum, but had advanced HIV/AIDS. When her asylum claim failed she sought permission to continue her stay saying that if returned she would not receive proper treatment and would die. . .
Applied – ZT v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 24-Nov-2005
The applicant entered the UK as a visitor, but resisted her return home saying that she had HIV, and would not receive proper treatment for her condition if returned to Zimbabwe.
Held: the prohibition against inhuman and degrading treatment . .
Cited – Wilkinson v Kitzinger and others FD 31-Jul-2006
The parties had gone through a ceremony of marriage in Columbia, being both women. After the relationship failed, the claimant sought a declaration that the witholding of the recognition of same-sex marriages recoginised in a foreign jurisdiction . .
Cited – Eastaway v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 10-May-2007
The applicant had been subject to company director disqualification proceedings. Eventually he gave an undertaking not to act as a company director, but then succeeded at the ECHR in a complaint of delay. He now sought release from his undertaking . .
Cited – Barclay and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and others CA 2-Dec-2008
The claimant appealed against refusal of his challenge to the new constitutional law for Sark, and sought a declaration of incompatibility under the 1998 Act. He said that by restricting the people who could stand for election, a free democracy had . .
Cited – McKinnon, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Home Affairs Admn 31-Jul-2009
Assurances for Extradition
Extradition of the defendant was sought to the US to face allegations of hacking into defence computers there. He said this would infringe his article 3 rights, saying that he suffered Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Held: The application failed. US . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.224575

Regina v M and Others: CACD 5 Oct 2001

The court considered the nature of the detention of a defendant when he was found unfit to plead. Rose LJ said: ‘The old orders available to the courts [including the hospital order with restrictions] do not include any punishment or any order that can be seen as retributive or deterrent. With the exception of an absolute discharge, they are concerned with the treatment and care of the accused.’

As to the effect of the Human Rights Convention Rose LJ said: ‘The right to liberty and security is the subject of article 5. Detention after conviction is only one of the cases in which deprivation of liberty is permitted by article 5.5(1). In the present connection, the other relevant paragraph of article 5(1) is (e): the lawful detention of persons of unsound mind. The protection of persons detained on the ground that they are of unsound mind is contained in article 5(4).’

Judges:

Rose LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Crim 2024, [2001] MHLR 177, [2002] 1 Cr App R 25, [2002] 1 WLR 824, [2002] Crim LR 57

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Juncal, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and others CA 25-Jul-2008
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for wrongful imprisonment having been detained in 1997 on being found unfit to plead to an offence of violence.
Held: Parliament had a legitimate concern for the protection of the public, and . .
Cited – Norman, Regina v CACD 31-Jul-2008
The defendant suffered a degenerative disease affecting his mental capacity, and at trial the issue of his fitness to plead arose.
Held: Where the issue of unfitness arose it was necessary for the court to exercise very careful case management . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Health

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201598

Regina v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Secretary of State For Health, ex Parte Fedesa and Others: ECJ 13 Nov 1990

ECJ 1. Community law – Principles – Legal certainty – Protection of legitimate expectations – Prohibition of the use in livestock farming of certain substances having a hormonal action in the absence of unanimity as to their harmlessness – Infringement – None (Council Directive 88/146) 2. Community law – Principles – Proportionality – Prohibition of an economic activity – Whether disproportionate – Assessment criteria – Discretionary power of the Community legislature in the field of the common agricultural policy – Judicial review – Limits (EEC Treaty, Arts 40 and 43) 3. Community law – Principles – Equal treatment – Harmonization measure applied equally to all the Member States – Differing effects depending on the previous state of national law – Discrimination – None 4. Agriculture – Approximation of laws – Prohibition of the use in livestock farming of certain substances having a hormonal action – Objectives pursued – Choice of legal basis – Article 43 of the Treaty – Misuse of powers – None
(EEC Treaty, Arts 39 and 43, Council Directive 88/146) 5. Measures adopted by the Community institutions – Procedure for enactment – Preparatory documents not affected by a procedural defect occurring at the stage of the final decision in the Council leading to annulment by the Court – Adoption of a new measure on the basis of earlier preparatory documents -Legality 6. Measures adopted by the Community institutions – Application ratione temporis – Period for compliance by the Member States with a directive expiring prior to its adoption – Retroactive effect – Permissibility in the light of the objective to be attained and in the absence of any infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations – Limits -Principle of non-retroactivity of penal provisions (Council Directive 88/146, Art. 10)
1. Having regard to the divergent appraisals by the national authorities of the Member States, reflected in the differences between existing national legislation, of the dangers which may result from the use of certain substances having a hormonal action, the Council, in deciding in the exercise of its discretionary power to adopt the solution of prohibiting them, neither infringed the principle of legal certainty nor frustrated the legitimate expectations of traders affected by that measure. 2. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, which is one of the general principles of Community law, the lawfulness of the prohibition of an economic activity is subject to the condition that the prohibitory measures are appropriate and necessary in order to achieve the objectives legitimately pursued by the legislation in question, it being understood that when there is a choice between several appropriate measures recourse must be had to the least onerous, and the disadvantages caused must not be disproportionate to the aims pursued. However, with regard to judicial review of compliance with those conditions it must be borne in mind that in matters concerning the common agricultural policy the Community legislature has a discretionary power which corresponds to the political responsibilities given to it by Articles 40 and 43 of the Treaty. Consequently, the legality of a measure adopted in that sphere can be affected only if the measure is manifestly inappropriate having regard to the objective which the competent institution is seeking to pursue. 3. Although a harmonization measure which is intended to standardize previously disparate rules of the Member States inevitably produces different effects depending on the prior state of the various national laws, there cannot be said to be discrimination where it applies equally to all Member States. 4. A decision may amount to a misuse of powers only if it appears, on the basis of objective, relevant and consistent factors, to have been taken with the exclusive purpose, or at any rate the main purpose, of achieving an end other than that stated or evading a procedure specifically prescribed by the Treaty for dealing with the circumstances of the case. That was not so in the case of Directive 88/146 prohibiting the use in livestock farming of certain substances having a hormonal action, which was adopted by the Council on the basis of Article 43 of the Treaty alone. By regulating conditions of the production and marketing of meat in order to improve its quality while curbing surplus production, that directive falls within the scope of the measures provided for by the common organization of the markets in meat and thus contributes to the attainment of the objectives set out in Article 39 of the Treaty. 5. The annulment by a judgment of the Court of a Council directive on account of a procedural defect concerning solely the manner in which it was finally adopted by the Council does not affect the preparatory acts of the other institutions. Therefore, these acts need not be repeated when the Council adopts a new directive replacing the one which has been annulled. Changes occurring in the interval in the composition of those institutions are of no effect since they do not affect the continuity of the institutions themselves. Whether or not a subsequent change in circumstances must be taken into consideration is for each institution to assess. 6. By fixing 1 January 1988 as the date of expiry of the period for implementation of Directive 88/146 prohibiting the use in livestock farming of substances having a hormonal action, Article 10 of the directive gives it retroactive effect in so far as the directive was adopted and notified in March 1988. Outside the criminal sphere, such retroactive effect is permissible, since, first, the directive replaced an earlier directive annulled because of a procedural defect, and the Council considered it necessary in order to avoid a temporary legal vacuum during the period between the annulment of one instrument and its replacement by a lawfully adopted text with regard to the existence of a basis in Community law for national provisions adopted by the Member States in order to comply with the directive which was annulled, and, secondly, there was no infringement of the legitimate expectations of the traders concerned, in light of the rapid succession of the two directives and the reason for which the first one was annulled. As regards the criminal sphere, on the other hand, Article 10 of the directive cannot be interpreted as requiring Member States to adopt measures which conflict with Community law, in particular with the principle that penal provisions may not have retroactive effect, which Community law incorporates, as a fundamental right, among its general principles. Nor may it provide a basis for criminal proceedings instituted under provisions of national law which may have been adopted in implementation of the annulled directive and whose sole basis is to be found therein.
In relation to an alleged infringement of the principle of legal certainty: ‘ . . having regard to the discretionary power conferred on the Council in the implementation of the common agricultural policy, be limited to examining whether the measure in question is vitiated by a manifest error or misuse of powers, or whether the authority in question has manifestly exceeded the limits of its discretion.’
and . . ‘The Court has consistently held that the principle of proportionality is one of the general principles of Community law. By virtue of that principle, the lawfulness of the prohibition of an economic activity is subject to the condition that the prohibitory measures are appropriate and necessary in order to achieve the objectives legitimately pursued by the legislation in question; when there is a choice between several appropriate measures recourse must be had to the least onerous, and the disadvantages caused must not be disproportionate to the aims pursued.’

Citations:

C-331/88, R-88/14, [1990] EUECJ R-88/146, [1990] ECR I-4023

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EEC Treaty 39 43, Council Directive 88/146

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v Asda Stores Limited and others HL 8-Feb-2001
The name ‘Parma Ham’ was controlled as to its use under Italian law, and the associated mark, the ‘corona ducale’, was to be applied to a sale of Parma Ham, including any packaging. Proper Parma Ham was imported and resold through the defendant’s . .
Cited – Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC 19-Jun-2013
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .
Cited – Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 25-Feb-2015
Appeal about the distribution of European Structural Funds among the regions of the United Kingdom. It arises out of the complaint of a number of local authorities in Merseyside and South Yorkshire about the way in which it is proposed to distribute . .
Cited – Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd SC 11-Mar-2015
Appeal about the proper approach of the courts where the defendant to a claim for possession of his home raises a defence of unlawful discrimination, contrary to the Equality Act 2010, by the claimant landlord. In particular, the issue is whether . .
Cited – Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Gubeladze SC 19-Jun-2019
The claimant had come from Latvia to the UK in 2008, but not registered under the Worker Registration Scheme until 2010. She now sought state pension credit. The SS appealed from a judgment that it was to calculate her entitlement to include her . .
Cited – Micula and Others v Romania SC 19-Feb-2020
The appellant sought to enforce a international arbitration award against the respondent. The award was made under an arrangement which became unlawful on Romania’s accession to the EU, and Romania obtained s stay pending resolution by the CJEU.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Agriculture, Health

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.134975

Regina on the Application of Goldsmith v The London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 27 Aug 2004

The claimant, a very elderly lady had lived in a residential home for some time. She fell and was admitted to hospital. The respondent said she could only leave the hospital to go to a nursing home. She and her family sought her return to the residential home she knew.
Held: The Authority’s decision making process was seriously flawed: ‘Judicial review is about process, and in my judgment the process here has been manifestly defective. ‘ The decision was quashed, and must be reconsidered.

Judges:

Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice Brooke Lord Justice Wall

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1170, (2004) 148 Sol Jo LB 1065

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 Part III, National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990 47(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Islington Borough Council Ex Parte Rixon QBD 17-Apr-1996
The local authority regarded lack of resources or facilities as an insuperable obstacle to any further attempt to make provision under the 1970 Act.
Held: A Local Authority should allow for non-statutory guidance in assessing a disabled . .
Cited – E v Secretary of State for the Home Department etc CA 2-Feb-2004
The court was asked as to the extent of the power of the IAT and Court of Appeal to reconsider a decision which it later appeared was based upon an error of fact, and the extent to which new evidence to demonstrate such an error could be admitted. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Judicial Review

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200656

Mersey Care NHS Trust, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and others: Admn 22 Jul 2004

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 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights:
‘By definition the issues which the mental health review tribunal has to deal with involve personal and clinical confidential information affecting individuals who are often very vulnerable and not always in a position to make an informed decision as to what may or may not be in their best interests. Questions of capacity may frequently arise and clinical progress may be affected by the consequences of publicity.’

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2005] 1 WLR 2469, [2004] EWHC 1749 (Admin), [2005] 2 All ER 820

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 78, Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983, Administration of Justice Act 1960 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pickering v Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Newspapers plc HL 1991
Damages were awarded for a breach of statutory duty where the claimant had suffered loss or damage by reason of the breach. The publication at issue went beyond reporting and ‘it reached deeply into the substance of the matter which the court had . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jan-2016
The applicant was a convicted murderer who had been held in a high security mental hospital. His application for unescorted leave had been refused, and he wished to challenge the decisions. Anonymity in the subsequent proceedings had been refused to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199832

Phillips, Harland (Administrators of the Estate of Michailidis), Papadimitriou; Symes (A Bankrupt), Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership), Domercq etc: ChD 30 Jul 2004

Under the Ciivil Procedure Rules, experts have acquired greater responsibilities to the court. Those responsibilities transcend their perceived obligations to the parties whom they give evidence.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1887 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1) CA 19-Dec-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 . .
See Also – Phillips and Another v Robin James Symes and Robin Symes Ltd ChD 9-Jul-2001
English proceedings were issued to claim against a partnership. Simultaneously proceedings were issued in Greece, but the Greek proceedings were served on the London parties first. The plaintiffs in Greece asked the English court to issue a stay of . .
See Also – Phillips v Symes CA 2003
Courts should be reluctant to exclude altogether evidence merely because it is written. If the purpose of the order sought was to trace assets it would be wrong to permit cross-examination which was designed to show that there had been a contempt of . .

Cited by:

Cited – EPI Environmental Technologies Inc and Another v Symphony Plastic Technologies Plc and Another ChD 21-Dec-2004
The claimant had developed an additive which would assist in making plastic bags bio-degradable. They alleged that, in breach of confidentiality agreements, the defendants had copied the product. The defendants said the confidentiality agreement was . .
See Also – Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis), Papadimitriou v Symes (A Bankrupt) Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership) Jean-Louis Domercq ChD 20-Oct-2004
Dr Z had given expert evidence in the principal proceedings. It was now said that that evidence had not been given in the proper way, and a remedy was now sought in costs.
Peter Smith J had held that: ‘It seems to me that in the administration . .
See Also – Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis), Papadimitriou v Symes (A Bankrupt) Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership) Jean-Louis Domercq etc ChD 20-Oct-2004
. .
See Also – Symes v Phillips and others CA 6-May-2005
. .
See Also – Symes v Phillips and others CA 19-May-2005
The applicant was in contempt of court. He successfully appealed a sentence of two years imprisonment, with the sentence being reduced to one year. Legally aided, he sought his costs from the claimant. The claimant replied that their part was only . .
See Also – Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis) v Symes (A Bankrupt), Nussberger, Galerie Nefer Ag, Geoff Rowley ChD 19-Aug-2005
The court allowed the appellant’s application to dispense with service of a claim form under the rule. The High Court became seised of the matter as at 19 January 2005. Further directions were given. . .
See Also – Phillips and others v Symes and others ChD 12-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Phillips and Another v Symes and Others (No 6) CA 19-May-2006
Proceedings were issued in England for service on the defendant in Switzerland, but because of an error by the Swiss Court were not properly served. Proceedings were then issued in Sitzerland, and seisin was claimed for the Swiss Court. The claimant . .
See Also – Phillips and others v Symes and others ChD 16-Oct-2006
. .
See Also – Phillips and Another v Symes and others HL 23-Jan-2008
Various parties had sought relief in the English courts and in Switzerland after an alleged fraud. There had been a mistake in service of the proceedings in England. The high court had dispensed with service an backdated the effect of the order to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199821

Secretary of State for Home Department, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal: Admn 7 Oct 2004

Order for release of mental patient conditional upon facilities being made available – infringement of human rights through continued detention.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Collins

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2194 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another ex parte IH HL 13-Nov-2003
The appellant had been found unfit to plead after assaulting his son, and he had been detained under the 1964 Act. He alleged his detention was in breach of his right to a fair trial. His release had been authorised subject to the appointment of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.215933

Regina on the Application of PD v West Midlands and North West Mental Health Review Tribunal: CA 17 Mar 2004

The medical member of the review tribunal to which the appellant had applied for his discharge from detention under section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 who was a consultant psychiatrist was not disqualified from considering the appellant’s case because he was employed by the Mersey Care National Health Service Trust: ‘We consider that [the reasonable and informed] observer would expect a consultant psychiatrist to apply the same concerns for the welfare of a patient, whether that patient was the consultant’s own, or a patient whose liberty depended upon the objective clinical judgment of the consultant in the context of a tribunal hearing.’

Judges:

Lord Justice May The Hon Mr Justice Parker Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 311

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Gillies v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 26-Jan-2006
The claimant said that the medical member of the tribunal which had heard his disability claim was biased. The doctor was on a temporary contract and also worked for an agency which contracted directly the Benfits Agency. The court of session had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.194581

DL v A Local Authority and Others: CA 28 Mar 2012

The LA sought to protect an elderly couple, one without capacity from their adult son who was said to be bullying them. The court was faced with questions as to its continued inherent jurisdiction to act in a situation not covered by the 2005 Act.
Held: The court’s inherent jurisdictions survived the Act.

Judges:

Maurice Kay, McFarlane, Davis LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 253, [2012] WLR(D) 101, [2012] 3 All ER 1064, [2012] LGR 757, [2012] Fam Law 1454, (2012) 15 CCL Rep 267, [2012] 3 WLR 1439, [2012] WTLR 1713, (2012) 127 BMLR 24, [2013] 2 FLR 511, [2012] 3 FCR 200, [2013] Fam 1, [2012] BLGR 757, [2012] CPLR 504

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Mental Capacity Act 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Local Government

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.452364

MM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Jul 2007

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:

Cited – Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jul-2016
The appellant had been detained in a mental hospital after a conviction. Later released, he was recalled, but he was not given written reasons as required by a DoH circular. However the SS referred the recall immediately to the Tribunal. He appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.254474

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another ex parte IH: HL 13 Nov 2003

The appellant had been found unfit to plead after assaulting his son, and he had been detained under the 1964 Act. He alleged his detention was in breach of his right to a fair trial. His release had been authorised subject to the appointment of a supervising psychiatrist. He complained that his detention was unlawful from that date until a decision was taken correctly.
Held: Though the tribunal lacked the power to secure compliance with its conditions, it did not lack the coercive power which is one of the essential attributes of a court. The lengthy failure to find accomodation did infringe the applicant’s rights. However the detention was not unlawful since there was no concensus for his release. A decision to defer is to be treated as a provisional decision which can be altered if there is a material change of circumstances.

Judges:

Lord Bingham Of Cornhill Lord Steyn Lord Hobhouse Of Woodborough Lord Scott Of Foscote Lord Rodger Of Earlsferry

Citations:

[2003] UKHL 59, Times 14-Nov-2003, Gazette 15-Jan-2004, [2003] 3 WLR 1278

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 5, European Convention on Human Rights 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (IH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 15-May-2002
The applicant was a restricted mental patient. His conditional release had been ordered, but required a consultant psychiatrist to be found who would agree to supervise him. None such could be found, and his detention continued. After two years he . .
Cited – Regina (on the application of K) v Camden and Islington Health Authority CA 21-Feb-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 . .
Cited – Winterwerp v The Netherlands ECHR 24-Oct-1979
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. . .
Cited – X v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Nov-1981
(Commission) The application was made a patient, restricted under the 1959 Act. A mental health review tribunal which concluded that the continued detention of a restricted patient was no longer justified had power to recommend but not to order the . .
Cited – Johnson v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Oct-1997
Mr Johnson awaited trial for crimes of violence. He was diagnosed mentally ill, and on conviction made subject to a hospital order, and restricted without limit of time. He made progress, but was not discharged or re-classified. At a fourth tribunal . .
Cited – Regina v Oxford Regional Mental Health Review Tribunal, Ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department (Campbell’s Case) HL 1988
The House decided that section 73 of the 1983 Act provided a two-stage process in relation to a patient’s conditional discharge. The tribunal first decides that it will direct the discharge subject to conditions, but defers giving the direction so . .

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Home Department, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal Admn 7-Oct-2004
Order for release of mental patient conditional upon facilities being made available – infringement of human rights through continued detention. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187759

Regina v East London and the City Mental Health NHS Trust and Another ex parte Von Brandenburg (Aka Hanley): HL 13 Nov 2003

The patient was ordered to be discharged and released from hospital. The tribunal making the order had not accepted the medical recommendations. His release was deferred pending the finding of accommodation, but in the meantime, a social worker applied for his re-admission.
Held: The approved social worker could not apply in these circumstances unless he considered reasonably and in good faith that he knew of circumstances which were not before the tribunal, and which would put a different complexion on that decision. The common law respects and protects the personal freedom of the individual, which may not be curtailed save for a reason and in circumstances sanctioned by the law of the land, but law may properly provide for the compulsory detention in hospital of those who suffer from mental disorder if detention is judged to be necessary for the health or safety of the patient or the protection of others. A person compulsorily detained on mental health grounds should have the right to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of his detention may be decided by a court.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Steyn Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Scott of Foscote Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

[2003] UKHL 58, Times 14-Nov-2003, Gazette 05-Feb-2004, [2004] 2 AC 280, [2004] Lloyds Rep Med 228, (2004) 7 CCL Rep 121, [2004] 1 All ER 400, [2003] 3 WLR 1265, [2004] HRLR 6, (2004) 76 BMLR 168

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – 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
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 . .
Mentioned – Regina v Managers of South Western Hospital and Another, Ex Parte M QBD 24-Mar-1993
The patient was detained on the application of an AMHP. In purported pursuance of section 11(4) the AMHP had consulted the patient’s mother as her nearest relative. However, the patient’s mother was not ordinarily resident in the UK, and, according . .
Cited – Pickering v Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Newspapers plc HL 1991
Damages were awarded for a breach of statutory duty where the claimant had suffered loss or damage by reason of the breach. The publication at issue went beyond reporting and ‘it reached deeply into the substance of the matter which the court had . .
Cited – Johnson v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Oct-1997
Mr Johnson awaited trial for crimes of violence. He was diagnosed mentally ill, and on conviction made subject to a hospital order, and restricted without limit of time. He made progress, but was not discharged or re-classified. At a fourth tribunal . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – 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
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 . .
Cited – P, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 11-Dec-2003
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.
Cited – Regina (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jan-2016
The applicant was a convicted murderer who had been held in a high security mental hospital. His application for unescorted leave had been refused, and he wished to challenge the decisions. Anonymity in the subsequent proceedings had been refused to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187758

PD, Regina (on the Application of) v West Midlands and North West Mental Health Review Tribunal: Admn 22 Oct 2003

The claimant was detained as a mental patient. He complained that a consultant employed by the NHS Trust which detained him, also sat on the panel of the tribunal which heard the review of his detention.
Held: Such proceedings did engage the applicant’s right to a fair trial. The issue was whether a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would perceive a real possibility of subconscious bias. The tribunal had to offer sufficient guarantees to exclude any legitimate doubt as to its impartiality. The consultant’s denial of bias was of no consequence. The consultant had no contact outside the tribunal with the case or any party to it. He was acting outside the roles in which he might be subject to any pressure, and his employment rights were established. No threat of bias was established.

Judges:

Silber J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 2469 (Admin), Times 31-Oct-2003, Gazette 02-Jan-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 3, Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983 (SI 1983/942) 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Porter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
Cited – Aerts v Belgium ECHR 30-Jul-1998
A person detained as a person of unsound mind should not be kept in a prison, but if the institution concerned is within the appropriate category, there is no breach of Article 5. While measures depriving a person of his liberty often involve an . .
Cited – Findlay v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Feb-1997
The applicant complained that the members of a court-martial were appointed by the Convening Officer, who was closely linked to the prosecuting authorities. The members of the court-martial were subordinate in rank to the Convening Officer who had . .
Cited – Johnson v Johnson 7-Sep-2000
(High Court of Australia) When looking to test whether a member of the public would perceive bias in a court, it is unnecessary to delve into the characteristics to be attributed to the fair-minded and informed observer. One is entitled to conclude . .
Cited – Regina v Boyd, Hastie, Spear (Courts Martial Appeal Court), Regina v Saunby, Clarkson, English, Williams, Dodds, and others HL 18-Jul-2002
Corts Martial System Complant with Human Rights
The applicants were each convicted by courts martial of offences under civil law. They claimed that the courts martial were not independent tribunals because of the position of the president of the court, and that it was wrong to try a serviceman by . .
Cited – Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited HL 19-Jun-2003
Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal.
Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the . .
Cited – Sramek v Austria ECHR 22-Oct-1984
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
The . .
Cited – Belilos v Switzerland ECHR 29-Apr-1988
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (validity of declaration); Violation of Art. 6-1; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – . .
Cited – Langborger v Sweden ECHR 22-Jun-1989
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
Cited – Morris v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Feb-2002
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to general structure of court martial system; No violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to specific complaints; No violation of Art. . .
Cited – Re A Company CA 1980
The court considered that even when not narrowly construing the word ‘officer’ in the Act, that word meant, in that context, ‘a person in a managerial position in regard to the company’s affairs’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187120

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.
Held: Following Fairley, the court did not have power to make the order it had. However the earlier order remained valid until revoked.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 2020 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 16, Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4, Mental Health Act 1983 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v H (On appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)) HL 30-Jan-2003
The defendant had been found unfit to stand trial, at a later hearing under the section, the jury had found that he had committed the act complained of. He was discharged but ordered to be placed on the sex offenders register. He appealed on the . .
Cited – Regina v Fairley CACD 2003
A section 37 order is not available to a court where a defendant has been found unfit to plead, with an additional finding fo fact that he had committed the act. That finding was not a finding of guilt. . .
Cited – Chuck v Cremer 24-Jul-1846
The plaintiff’s solicitor obtained an attachment against the defendant in default of a pleaded defence, disregarding a court order extending the period for filing the defence, which he considered to be a nullity. The order in question had been . .
Cited – Hadkinson v Hadkinson CA 1952
The courts adopt an approach similar to that of the United States courts where there has been a significant contempt on the part of a party to litigation. Denning LJ said: ‘Those cases seem to me to point the way to the modern rule. It is a strong . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185651

Ward v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Epsom and St Helier NHS Trust: CA 30 Jul 2003

The claimant sought damages for the circumstances of her having been taken into custody. A magistrate had issued a warrant to require her to be removed to a place of safety. The warrant named a social worker and doctor to accompany the officer. The warrant was executed but the social worker and doctor were not those named.
Held: Magistrates could issue a warrant without naming the social worker or doctor who would be required under the section to accompany the police officer. If so, such workers could be selected as appropriate. The addition of the names to the warrant was to be read as a restriction on the way the warrant was to be executed, and the officer could not assume that the warrant would have been issued without names or with alternative names. The warrant itself was valid, but the mode of execution was not.

Judges:

Lord Justice Schiemann Lord Justice Latham

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1152, Times 02-Sep-2003, Gazette 02-Oct-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 135(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Ward v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 5-May-2005
The claimant had been taken under warrant to a mental hospital, but was found not to be suffering any mental illness. She complained that the arrest was unlawful, since the police officer had not been accompanied by the people named on the warrant. . .

Cited by:

Appeal From – Ward v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 5-May-2005
The claimant had been taken under warrant to a mental hospital, but was found not to be suffering any mental illness. She complained that the arrest was unlawful, since the police officer had not been accompanied by the people named on the warrant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Magistrates, Police

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185243

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 the potential damage from seclusion, and therefore the need for proper systems for its use. The Special Hospitals had sought to operate their own procedures, reflecting their own needs. Seclusion infringes Article 8 unless it can be justified under Article 8(2). Seclusion of a detained psychiatric patient was capable of amounting to a breach of Article 3.
Ashworth were not entitled to treat as being in seclusion a large number of patients who are not in fact secluded as defined by the Code of Practice and then depart from the Code of Practice in relation to a group which was defined solely by reference to how long its members have been secluded. Airedale were not justified in keeping Mr S in seclusion from the time when it ceased to be a necessary and proportionate response to the risk he presented to others.

Judges:

The Master Of The Rolls Lady Justice Hale Lord Justice Latham

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1036, Times 25-Jul-2003, [2004] QB 395, [2003] Lloyds Rep Med 534, [2003] 3 WLR 1505, (2003) 74 BMLR 178, [2003] HRLR 38

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3 8, Mental Health Act 1983 118

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – S v Airedale National Health Service Trust QBD 22-Aug-2002
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 . .
Cited – Pountney v Griffiths; Regina v Bracknell Justices, Ex parte Griffiths HL 1976
The applicant was a male nurse at Broadmoor Special Hospital. He was on duty while patients were saying goodbye to visitors. He approached the detained patient telling him to ‘come on’ and allegedly punched him on the shoulder. The patient brought . .
Cited – B v Croydon Health Authority CA 30-Nov-1994
The feeding by tube of a mental patient who was unable and unwilling to consent can remain treatment, and within the decision of the doctors. In the context of whether the force-feeding an anorexic was authorised by section 63, the Court of Appeal . .
Cited – Regina v Broadmoor Special Hospital Authority and Secretary of State for Department of Health ex parte S, H and D (2) CA 5-Feb-1998
Persons detained under Mental Health Acts could be subject to random non-consensual searches even if this went against medical opinion. The power to seclude a patient within the hospital is implied from the power to detain as a ‘necessary ingredient . .
Cited – Hutchison Reid v Secretary Of State For Scotland and Another HL 5-Feb-1998
(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 . .
Cited – In re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) HL 4-May-1989
Where a patient lacks capacity, there is the power to provide him with whatever treatment or care is necessary in his own best interests. Medical treatment can be undertaken in an emergency even if, through a lack of capacity, no consent had been . .
Cited – Regina (N) v Dr M and Others CA 6-Dec-2002
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 . .
Cited – A v United Kingdom ECHR 1980
The Commission declared admissible a complaint from a Broadmoor patient who had been secluded for five weeks after a fire. A friendly settlement was reached, without admission of liability but on the basis that new guidelines for the use of . .
Cited – Regina v Hallstrom and another, ex parte W (No 2) 1986
A judicial review application by a mental patient, requires the permission of a High Court judge: ‘There is . . a canon of construction that Parliament is presumed not to enact legislation which interferes with the liberty of the subject without . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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, . .
Cited – Keenan v The United Kingdom ECHR 3-Apr-2001
A young prisoner was known to be at risk of suicide, but nevertheless was not provided with adequate specialist medical supervision. He was punished for an offence, by way of segregation which further put him at risk.
Held: Inhuman and . .
Cited – Z And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-May-2001
Four children complained that, for years before they were taken into care by the local authority, its social services department was well aware that they were living in filthy conditions and suffering ‘appalling’ neglect in the home of their . .
Cited – Pretty v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2002
Right to Life Did Not include Right to Death
The applicant was paralysed and suffered a degenerative condition. She wanted her husband to be allowed to assist her suicide by accompanying her to Switzerland. English law would not excuse such behaviour. She argued that the right to die is not . .
Cited – Herczegfalvy v Austria ECHR 24-Sep-1992
The applicant was detained in an institution for mentally deranged offenders. While so detained he was subjected to the forcible administration of food and neuroleptics and to handcuffing to a security bed. He complained of violation of his Article . .
Cited – Raninen v Finland ECHR 16-Dec-1997
The complainant had been handcuffed unjustifiably and in public but not with the intention of debasing or humiliating him and not so as to affect him sufficiently to attain the minimum level of severity.
Held: The application was rejected The . .
Cited – Ashingdane v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-1985
The right of access to the courts is not absolute but may be subject to limitations. These are permitted by implication since the right of access ‘by its very nature calls for regulation by the State, regulation which may vary in time and place . .
Cited – Bouamar v Belgium ECHR 29-Feb-1988
Hudoc Violation of Art. 5-1; Violation of Art. 5-4; Just satisfaction reserved; Judgment (Just satisfaction) Struck out of the list (friendly settlement)
A person detained as a juvenile in need of . .
Cited – Aerts v Belgium ECHR 30-Jul-1998
A person detained as a person of unsound mind should not be kept in a prison, but if the institution concerned is within the appropriate category, there is no breach of Article 5. While measures depriving a person of his liberty often involve an . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Hackney London Borough Council CA 1984
The court doubted whether the doctrine of issue estoppel is applicable in judicial review proceedings. After holding that on the facts of the case it did not arise as a defence, the court approved, by the way, the judgment at first instance which . .
See Also – Regina v Ashworth Special Hospital Trust, ex parte Munjaz 10-Oct-2000
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 . .
Appeal from – Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority, Ex parte Munjaz (No 2) Admn 5-Jul-2002
The court dismissed the claimant’s complaint that the seclusion policies operated at Ashworth Special Hospital infringed his human rights. The Special Hospitals operated policies for seclusion which differed from the Code of Practice laid down under . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 . .
Cited – Kambadzi (previously referred to as SK (Zimbabwe)) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-May-2011
False Imprisonment Damages / Immigration Detention
The respondent had held the claimant in custody, but had failed to follow its own procedures. The claimant appealed against the rejection of his claim of false imprisonment. He had overstayed his immigration leave, and after convictions had served a . .
At Court of Appeal – C Munjaz v United Kingdom ECHR 20-Mar-2008
The applicant complained of his seclusion whilst being detaned at a secure mental hospital.
Held: The court referred several questions back to the parties to be answered. . .
At Court of Appeal – Munjaz v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Jul-2012
The applicant was detained in a secure mental hospital. He complained that he had been held in seclusion.
Held: The complaints under articles 5 and 8 were admissible, but there had been no violation of the applicant’s rights in these . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184769

Quintavalle, Regina (on the Application of) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority: CA 16 May 2003

A licence was sought so that a couple could have a child who would be tissue typed to establish his suitability to provide an umbilical cord after his birth to help treat his future brother. A licence had been granted subject to conditions, and the applicant now challenged the right of the Authority to grant that licence, saying that the proposal was not treatment within the Act, which should only extend to assisting women overcoming infertility.
Held: The purpose of the Act had been considered in extenso recently. The carrying of a child who would not suffer the same defect as an existing child was capable of assisting the mother to bear a child. ‘The fact that some practices (e.g. a biopsy) designed to secure the suitable condition, or determine the suitability, of embryos to be placed in a woman involve use of an embryo does not mean that all practices for such a purpose involve ‘use’ of the embryo, or therefore require to be licensed as activities under paragraph 1(1) of Schedule 2.’ The testing of the embryos was proper for that purpose.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Schiemann Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 667, Times 20-May-2003, [2003] 2 WLR 1403, Gazette 10-Jul-2003, [2003] 2 AC 687, [2004] QB 168

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance) HL 13-Mar-2003
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention
The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act.
Held: The challenge failed. The court was to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Carson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 17-Jun-2003
The claimant Reynolds challenged the differential treatment by age of jobseeker’s allowance. Carson complained that as a foreign resident pensioner, her benefits had not been uprated. The questions in each case were whether the benefit affected a . .
Cited – Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant challenged the decision of the court that the sperm donor who had fertilised her eggs to create embryos stored by the respondent IVF clinic, could withdraw his consent to their continued storage or use.
Held: The judge worked . .
Cited – In Re R (Parental responsibility: IVF baby); D (A Child), Re HL 12-May-2005
The parents had received IVF treatment together, but had separated before the child was born. The mother resisted an application by the father for a declaration of paternity.
Held: The father’s appeal failed. The Act made statutory provision . .
Appeal from – Quintavalle v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority HL 28-Apr-2005
The parents of a boy suffering a serious genetic disorder sought IVF treament in which any embryo would be tested for its pre-implantation genetic status. Only an embryo capable of producing the stem cells necessary to cure the boy would be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Administrative

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182350

Barry v Butlin: PC 8 Dec 1838

The testator, who had one son, bequeathed legacies to Percy, his attorney, one Butlin, to whom he also bequeathed the residue of his estate, and Whitehead, his butler. The will was upheld by the judge in the Prerogative Court and the son appealed.
Held: The case law establishes that the proposition that the propounder of a will: ‘must satisfy the conscience of the court that the instrument so propounded is the last will of a free and capable testator.’ The Board rejected a suggestion that the onus of proof could only be discharged by evidence of prior instructions for or subsequent reading over of the will before execution by the testator, saying: ‘Nor can it be necessary, that in all such cases, even if the testator’s capacity is doubtful, the precise species of evidence of the deceased’s knowledge of the will is to be in the shape of instructions for, or reading over the instrument. They form, no doubt, the most satisfactory, but they are not the only satisfactory description of proof, by which the cognizance of the contents of the will may be brought home to the deceased. The court would naturally look for such evidence; in some cases it might be impossible to establish a will without it, but it has no right in every case to require it.’
The rules for admitting a will to probate are two. Baron Parke said: ‘the onus probandi lies in every case upon the party propounding a will, and he must satisfy the conscience of the court that the instrument so propounded is the last will of a free and capable testator. The second is, that if a party wrote or prepares a will under which he takes a benefit, that is a circumstance that ought generally to excite the suspicion of the court, and calls upon it to be vigilant and jealous in examining the evidence in support of the instrument, in favour of which it ought not to pronounce unless the suspicion is removed, and it is judicially satisfied that the paper propounded does express the true will of the deceased.’ The conscience of the court must be satisfied by the evidence.’

Judges:

Baron Parke

Citations:

(1838) 2 Moores PCC 480, [1838] EngR 1051, (1838) 1 Curt 637, (1838) 163 ER 223, [1838] EngR 1056, (1838) 2 Moo PC 480, (1838) 12 ER 1089, [1836] EngR 855, (1836) 1 Moo PC 98, (1836) 12 ER 749, [1838] UKPC 22

Links:

Commonlii, Commonlii, Commonlii, Bailii

Citing:

Appeal from – Butlin v Barry 5-Sep-1837
(Prerogative Court) A will being drawn by a solicitor, in which a considerable legacy was given to himself and to the medical man and butler of the deceased, excluding an only son, the presumption of law is strong against the act, and the Court . .
See Also – Barry v Butlin 22-Jun-1836
The hearing of a cause in the Prerogative Court is one continuous act, and after a cause has been set down for sentence on the second assignation, it is not competent for either of the litigant parties to interpose an appeal, till sentence has been . .

Cited by:

Cited – Fuller v Strum CA 7-Dec-2001
The appellant challenged a finding that only part of a will was valid. The part made a gift to his son, ‘albeit very grudgingly’, saying ‘I hate him like poison, that Irish bastard.’
Held: The onus on the propounder of a will to show that it . .
Cited – Thompson and others v Thompson and others FdNI 16-Feb-2003
The family sought to challenge the validity of the will, saying the testator lacked capacity, and that he had made the will under the undue influence of the beneficiaries.
Held: There was clear evidence that the testator, whilst changeable, . .
Cited – Sherrington v Sherrington CA 22-Mar-2005
The deceased, a solicitor of long standing, was said to have signed his will without having read it, and had two witnesses sign the document without them knowing what they were attesting. He had remarried, and the will was challenged by his . .
Cited – In the Estate of Fuld, decd (No 3) ChD 1967
The deceased had spent relatively equal periods in two or more countries. The parties disputed his domicile.
Held: A blind adherence to foreign law can not be always expected of an English Court. The legal relationship between a person and the . .
Cited – Agulian and Another v Cyganik CA 24-Feb-2006
The question was whether the deceased had lost his domicile of birth and acquired one of choice when living and working in the UK for 43 years. He had retained land in Cyprus, but lived here.
Held: He had retained his domicile of birth: . .
Cited – Fuller v Strum ChD 20-Dec-2000
Mr Strum had come to England as a refugee from Nazi Germany. He had then left to live in Israel, but retained his property in London. A will was challenged on the basis that the signature had been forged. The two attesting witnesses asserted that . .
Cited – Carapeto v William Marsh Good and others CA 20-Jun-2002
Reltives of the deceased had challenged the will, alleging undue influence and lack of capacity. They sought leave to appeal the grant of probate of the will.
Held: The appeal had no realistic prospect of success. . .
Cited – Perrins v Holland and Others; In re Perrins, deceased CA 21-Jul-2010
The testator had given instructions for his will and received a draft will. The judge had found that he had capacity to make the will when he gave instructions but not when it was executed. The will having been made in accordance with his . .
Cited – Tyrrell v Painton CA 1894
The rule throwing upon the party propounding a will the burden of showing that it expresses the true will of the deceased is not confined to cases where the will is prepared by a person taking a benefit under it. After reference to Barry v Butlin . .
Cited – Wintle v Nye HL 1959
Mrs Wells, the testatrix, was an elderly lady living on her own. She neither had business experience nor the benefit of independent professional advice. She made a complex will and a codicil prepared by Mr Nye, a solicitor. He was not a close friend . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Health

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181901

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 a psychopathic personality disorder. Section 63 disposed of the requirement for consent to treatment, but did not make it clear that Part IV was to apply to a mental disorder from which a person suffered whilst liable to be detained. Compulsory treatment was a serious infringement of his rights and could only follow the clearest of statements of stautory intent. The detention was unlawful. ‘treatment for the mental disorder from which he is suffering’ meant treatment for the form of mental disorder from which he was classified as suffering under the Act. A patient classified as suffering from psychopathic disorder could not be treated as mentally ill and vice versa.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson Lord Justice Simon Brown Lord Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 547, Times 24-Apr-2003, [2003] 1 WLR 1886

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 37(7) 41(1) 63

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – B, Regina (on the Application of) v Ashworth Hospital Authority HL 17-Mar-2005
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 . .

Cited by:

Distinguished – Regina (C) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and Others QBD 17-Jan-2005
C applied for judicial review of the refusal by the respondent to order his absolute discharge, and the continuation of the restriction order. He said the tribunal had taken account of earlier reporst referring to a psychopathic personality . .
Distinguished – Regina on the Application of A l v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 20-Jan-2005
The claimant complained of his recall to hospital. He had in 1991 been foundf not guilty of murder by reason of his insanity, and had been detained in a secure hospital, but then released conditionally. He said the recall on medical grounds was . .
Appeal from – B, Regina (on the Application of) v Ashworth Hospital Authority HL 17-Mar-2005
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181164

AHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B: QBD 26 Feb 2003

An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents had been given, and the concept under the Act of ‘treatment together’. Any interference with the right to family life was proportionate and necessary.

Judges:

The President

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 259 (QB), Gazette 01-May-2003, [2003] 1 FLR 1091

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Law Act 1986 55A, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 28 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – U v W (Attorney-General Intervening) FD 4-Mar-1997
The restriction on the freedom to provide human fertility treatment to licensees of the Authority was not a breach of the EU treaty. There is a particular need for certainty in provisions affecting the status of a child. There is a mental element . .
Cited – Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
Cited – Marckx v Belgium ECHR 13-Jun-1979
Recognition of illegitimate children
The complaint related to the manner in which parents were required to adopt their own illegitimate child in order to increase his rights. Under Belgian law, no legal bond between an unmarried mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth. . .
Cited – Kroon And Others v The Netherlands ECHR 27-Oct-1994
Neither marriage nor living together were necessarily a requirement for establishing family ties, exceptionally other factors may . . serve to demonstrate that a relationship has sufficient constancy to create de facto ‘family ties’. The . .
Cited – Re B (Parentage) FD 1996
A mother applied for financial provision for her twin children under 1989 Act Sch 1. The father asked whether he was their parent within the Schedule. They had been born by artificial insemination. He accepted that he was the donor of the sperm and . .
Cited – Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB CA 6-Feb-1997
At the applicant’s request samples of sperm were taken from her husband hours prior to his death, when he was in a coma.
Held: Sperm cannot lawfully be taken from a comatose man in order later to allow his surviving wife to be artificially . .
Cited – McMichael v United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-1995
In the course of care proceedings, medical and social services’ reports were disclosed to the courts, but not to the parents involved.
Held: The courts’ failure to show reports to the parents in care proceedings was a breach of the Convention. . .
Cited – Re H; Re G (Adoption: Consultation of Unmarried Fathers) CA 2001
Not every natural father has a right to respect for his family life with regard to every child of whom he may be the father (see also McMichael v United Kingdom (1995) 20 EHRR 205). The application of Art 8(1) will depend upon the facts of each . .
Cited – Re S (Freeing for Adoption) CA 2002
If parliament always foresaw what possibilities might arise, courts would never have anything to interpret. . .
Cited – Mrs U v Centre for Reproductive Medicine CA 2002
The 1990 Act lays great emphasis upon consent. Scientific techniques developed since the first IVF baby open up the possibility of creating human life in quite new ways bringing huge practical and ethical difficulties. These have to be balanced . .
Cited – Mikulic v Croatia ECHR 7-Feb-2002
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 13 with regard to the complaint under Article 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13 with regard to the . .
Cited – Re R (A Child) CA 19-Feb-2003
. .
Cited – Regina (Rose and Another) v Secretary of State for Health and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Admn 26-Jul-2002
Applications were made, challenging the refusal of the Secretary of State for Health, and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, to institute a system where a child born by artificial insemination could make enquiries as to his or her . .
Cited – Johansen v Norway ECHR 7-Aug-1996
The court had to consider a permanent placement of a child with a view to adoption in oposition to the natural parents’ wishes.
Held: Particular weight should be attached to the best interests of the child, which may override those of the . .
See also – Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v Mr and Mrs A, YA, ZA, Mr and Mrs B T Authority QBD 4-Nov-2002
At a fertility clinic, eggs were fertilised with the sperm from the wrong father. It was noticed only because after the birth of the twins, the colour of their skin was different from the mother and putative father.
Held: Difficult issues of . .

Cited by:

See also – Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v Mr and Mrs A, YA, ZA, Mr and Mrs B T Authority QBD 4-Nov-2002
At a fertility clinic, eggs were fertilised with the sperm from the wrong father. It was noticed only because after the birth of the twins, the colour of their skin was different from the mother and putative father.
Held: Difficult issues of . .
Cited – Quintavalle v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority HL 28-Apr-2005
The parents of a boy suffering a serious genetic disorder sought IVF treament in which any embryo would be tested for its pre-implantation genetic status. Only an embryo capable of producing the stem cells necessary to cure the boy would be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179570

Regina v H (On appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)): HL 30 Jan 2003

The defendant had been found unfit to stand trial, at a later hearing under the section, the jury had found that he had committed the act complained of. He was discharged but ordered to be placed on the sex offenders register. He appealed on the basis that the later finding was incompatible with the Convention.
Held: A difficult balance had to be found between the rights of a defendant unable to defend himself, and the need to control someone who might pose a risk to the public. The court must first under s4A, see how the issue is classified in British law. Here a crime was alleged. However the function of a hearing under section 4A was to protect the defendant, not to decide whether he had committed an offence, and no conviction or penalty would follow. The section was compatible.

Judges:

Bingham of Cornhill, Nicholls of Birkenhead, Hutton, Hobhouse of Woodborough, Walker of Gestingthorpe LL

Citations:

Times 31-Jan-2003, [2003] UKHL 1, [2003] 1 WLR 411, [2003] 2 Cr App R 2, (2003) 167 JPN 155, [2003] 1 All ER 497, (2003) 71 BMLR 146, [2003] HRLR 19, (2003) 167 JP 125

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4A, European Convention on Human Rights 6

Citing:

Cited – Engel And Others v The Netherlands (1) ECHR 8-Jun-1976
The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining . .
Cited – Regina v Antoine HL 30-Mar-2000
The appellant sought to argue that despite having been found unfit to plead under the 1964 Act, it was still open to him to argue that the defence under section 2 of the 1957 Act applied, and that he was entitled to be plead diminished . .

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Regina on the Application of South West Yorkshire Mental Health NHS Trust v Crown Court at Bradford CA 19-Dec-2003
A appealed an order made by the Crown Court under the 1964 Act for his detention in a mental hospital on the grounds that he was unfit to enter a plea to the charge of murder.
Held: The Court of Appal had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. . .
Cited – W v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council CA 6-May-2004
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 . .
Cited – Regina v Chal CACD 5-Oct-2007
The defendant appealed the decision of the court in a hearing under the 1964 Act that he had been involved in the offence at issue. He said the court had been wrong to admit hearsay evidence.
Held: The prosecution had had to present evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.178821

Regina (Quintaville) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority: QBD 20 Dec 2002

The applicant sought a judicial review of the respondent’s issue of a licence for genetic screening. They claimed this was outside the statutory powers of the respondent.
Held: The Act specifically allowed the Authority to issue licences which were for activities taking place in the course of treatment. The present licence would allow tissue typing, which was solely for the purpose of allowing to go forward a pregnancy which would produce a child with tissue compatible with an elder sibling. That could not be said to be necessary or desirable for the purpose of assisting a woman to carry a child.

Judges:

Maurice Kay, J

Citations:

Times 20-Jan-2003, [2002] EWHC 2785 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178780

Artegodan v Commission: ECFI 26 Nov 2002

ECJ Medicinal products for human use – Community arbitration procedures – Withdrawal of marketing authorisations – Competence – Criteria for withdrawal – Anorectics: amfepramone, clobenzorex, fenproporex, norpseudoephedrine, phentermine – Directives 65/65/EEC and 75/319/EEC.

Citations:

T-74/00, [2002] EUECJ T-74/00, [2002] ECR 11-495

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Artegodan v Commission ECFI 28-Jun-2000
. .
See Also – Commission v Artegodan and others ECJ 24-Jul-2003
. .
See Also – Artegodan v Commission ECFI 5-Sep-2001
. .
See Also – Commission v Artegodan and others (Order) ECJ 8-May-2003
. .

Cited by:

Cited – British American Tobacco UK Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health Admn 5-Nov-2004
The claimants challenged the validity of regulations restricting cigarette advertisements, saying that greater exceptions should have been allowed, and that the regulations infringed their commercial right of free speech.
Held: The Regulations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Commercial, Arbitration

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178574

Regina (N) v Dr M and Others: CA 6 Dec 2002

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 convincingly. The standard of proof was high, though not the criminal standard. To comply with Human Rights law, they also had to show that it was in her best interests. This is a wider test than medical necessity. Despite the applicant’s own expert’s opinion, the standard of proof had been reached in this case.
Dyson LJ said that cross-examination in judicial review cases should be ordered only if it is necessary to enable the court to determine factual issues for itself.

Judges:

Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Rix, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

Times 12-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1789, [2003] 1 WLR 562, [2003] Lloyd’s Rep Med 81, (2003) 72 BMLR 81, [2003] 1 FCR 124, [2003] 1 FLR 667, [2003] Fam Law 160

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3, Mental Health Act 1983 58(3)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In Re S (Adult Patient: Sterilisation) CA 26-May-2000
The court should decide what is in the best interests of a patient where she was unable to give consent herself. The test of whether what was proposed was within the range of what reasonable and competent medical practitioners might propose, got the . .
Cited – Herczegfalvy v Austria ECHR 24-Sep-1992
The applicant was detained in an institution for mentally deranged offenders. While so detained he was subjected to the forcible administration of food and neuroleptics and to handcuffing to a security bed. He complained of violation of his Article . .
Cited – Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee QBD 1957
Professional to use Skilled Persons Ordinary Care
Negligence was alleged against a doctor.
Held: McNair J directed the jury: ‘Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test . .
Cited – Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority HL 24-Jul-1997
The plaintiff suffered catastrophic brain damage as a result of cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a child whilst at the defendant hospital. A doctor was summoned but failed to attend, and the child suffered cardiac arrest and brain . .
Cited – Regina (Wilkinson) v Broadmoor Special Hospital and Others CA 22-Oct-2001
A detained mental patient sought to challenge a decision by his RMO that he should receive anti-psychotic medication, despite his refusal to consent, and to challenge a certificate issued by the SOAD.
Held: Where a mental patient sought to . .

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – MH, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Department of Health CA 3-Dec-2004
The patient had been detained under the Act and was incapable of making an application for her freedom.
Held: There was a duty on the state to ensure that mechanisms were made available to a patient to apply to review her continued detention . .
Cited – Regina (DJ) v Mental Health Review Tribunal; Regina (AN) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) Admn 11-Apr-2005
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 . .
Cited – MH v Secretary of State for the Department of Health and others HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant, detained for assessment under section 2, was too disabled to make an application to the court on her own behalf. After a dispute between her mother and the medical officer over her treatment, an application was made to the county . .
Cited – AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others CA 21-Dec-2005
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 . .
Cited – B, Regina (on the Application Of) v SS (Responsible Medical Officer) and others CA 26-Jan-2006
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 . .
Cited – Al-Sweady and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Defence Admn 2-Oct-2009
The claimant’s son had died whilst in the custody of the British Armed Forces in Iraq. His uncle now claimed that his human rights had been infringed. The case ‘raised a fundamental issue of jurisdiction under Article 1 of the ECHR because if the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178428

Pfizer Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health: CA 6 Nov 2002

The applicant appealed a refusal of a judicial review of the respondent’s decision to restrict the prescription of their drug Viagra. They argued that under the transparency directive, the government was obliged to carry out a public process of comparing priorities.
Held: The process of making this decision was one of allocating funds to competing needs and choosing priorities. That was essentially a political decision about the affordability of different remedies. It was not clear what sort of analysis might be given if ordered, and was not to be required as a pre-requisite of restricting prescription.

Judges:

Lord Justice Buxton, Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

Times 11-Nov-2002, Gazette 16-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1566

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 89/105/EEC the Transarency Directive Art 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178109

Regina (R) v Mersey Care NHS Trust: QBD 7 Aug 2002

The claimant complained that her continued detention for mental health treatment contravened her human rights. She had been detained compulsorily for treatment. A later assessment provided that she could be at home, with a right to by required to continue treatment as an inpatient.
Held: The fact that a continued substantial part of her treatment would be as an inpatient meant that the order was valid. When considering the second stage of the procedure, the conditions at that time were to be considered, not those at the time of the original detention.

Judges:

Wilson J

Citations:

Times 11-Oct-2002, [2002] EWHC 1810 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 3 20, European Convention on Human Rights 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177398

Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Atkinson, Hughes: QBD 9 Oct 2002

The defendants were prosecuted for various offences relating to the selling and marketing of veterinary products without being licensed. Their cases were dismissed, when the prosecution put forward evidence as to the nature of what was being sold, but only in the form of the labels on the packages. The defence successfully argued that chemical analysis should have been provided.
Held: Under the 1988 Act, the labels were statements and admissible as evidence. Under the 1994 Regulations, the ingredients did not need to be proved. Cases remitted.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke and Mr Justice Bell

Citations:

Gazette 07-Nov-2002, [2002] EWHC 2028 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Medicines Act 1968 58(2)(a) 67, Medicines (Veterinary Drugs)(Prescription Only) Order 1991, Marketing Authorisations for Veterinary Medical Products Regulations 1994, Criminal Justice Act 1988 24(1)

Crime, Health, Evidence

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177380