Category: Health

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: Permission to appeal was refused. The child’s death was inevitable. The hospital sought advice from third party doctors which confirmed their advice. ‘The facts (so we considered) were clear; the medical opinion was unambiguous; and, although one could not reasonably expect the parents to be able to bring objective opinion to bear upon so dreadful a situation, the only proper programme for OT in his interests was, as his own independent, professional representative contended, entirely obvious. Our view was that any accession by the trial judge to Mr Bowen’s application for an adjournment, whether on 6 March or on 19 March 2009 or, insofar as it could be said actually then to have been made, on any of the intervening days, would, in the light of OT’s condition, itself have been appealable. What plainly was not appealable was the judge’s decision to proceed forthwith, to conduct a full-scale, intensive, efficient yet unhurried determination, calibrated with an urgency commensurate with his generally deteriorating condition, of the most painful and profound issue imaginable, namely in effect whether OT should pass on immediately, or a little later following (so the judge found after an elaborate net reckoning of all relevant factors) profound further pain and misery.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Wilson

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 409

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.343893

Cooper, Regina v: CACD 20 Sep 2010

The appellant pleaded guilty to manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility and attempted murder. He was sentenced for manslaughter to imprisonment for public protection pursuant to section 225 of the 2003 Act with a minimum term of 6 years, less time spent on remand, and for attempted murder to a similar sentence with a minimum term of 4 and a half years, less time spent on remand. On both counts a Hospital and Restriction order was made pursuant to section 45A of the Mental Health Act 1983 as amended, directing that the appellant was to remain at Guild Lodge secure accommodation, as opposed to prison. The effect of this order was to make the appellant subject to the restrictions contained within section 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983 concerning his release from hospital, where upon depending upon any prior assessment of the Parole Board he would be returned to prison.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2335, [2010] MHLR 240

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 45A, Criminal Justice Act 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Health

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.425555

Kirklees Council v RE: FD 3 Oct 2014

Application by Kirklees Council for various declarations in relation to a young baby boy, SE, who was desperately ill in hospital. In essence, Kirklees applied for a declaration that it was not in SE’s interests to receive further life sustaining treatment. By the time the case was heard, the Local Authority applied for a further declaration, namely that it was lawful for his treating clinicians to provide him with palliative care only.

Judges:

Moor J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 3182 (Fam), (2015) 142 BMLR 170, [2015] 1 FLR 1316, 142 BMLR 170, [2015] 2 FCR 438, [2015] FLR 1316, [2014] Fam Law 1679

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Health

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.537739

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

The court considered the effect of an immigrant’s mental illness on the Home Secretary’s powers to refuse to grant him exceptional leave to enter or remain.

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 3026

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971, Mental Health Act 1983, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.330970

W v L: CA 1974

For civil patients, it matters a great deal whether the classification of their condition is ‘severe subnormality’ or just ‘subnormality’ or whether it is ‘mental illness’ or ‘psychopathic disorder’. Lawton LJ discussed the construction of the phrase ‘mental illness’: ‘The answer in my judgment is to be found in the advice which Lord Reid gave in Cozens v. Brutus [1973] AC 854 at 861, namely that ordinary words in the English language should be construed in the way that ordinary sensible people would construe them. That being the right test, then I ask myself what would the ordinary sensible person have said about the patient’s condition in this case . . In my judgment such a person would have said ‘well the fellow is obviously mentally ill’. It is that application of the sensible person’s assessment of the condition, plus the medical indication, which in my judgment brought the case within the classification of mental illness and justified the finding of the County Court Judge.’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

[1974] QB 711

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Brutus v Cozens HL 19-Jul-1972
The House was asked whether the conduct of the defendant at a tennis match at Wimbledon amounted to using ‘insulting words or behaviour’ whereby a breach of the peace was likely to be occasioned contrary to section 5. He went onto court 2, blew a . .

Cited by:

Cited – 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 – 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 . .
Cited – McFaddens (A Firm) v Platford TCC 30-Jan-2009
The claimant firm of solicitors had been found negligent, and now sought a contribution to the damages awarded from the barrister defendant. They had not managed properly issues as to their clients competence to handle the proceedings.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.224203

Re W (Enduring Power of Attorney): 2000

The law allows those with capacity to take treatment decisions which on any objective view are reasonable. A power of an attorney to make gifts of the donor’s property is extremely limited and without the authorisation of the court does not extend to the making of gifts as part of inheritance tax planning.
The onus of establishing incapacity lies on the party who seeks to rebut the presumption.
Jules Sher QC said: ‘she ought to have known the law if she was to take on the responsibility of such an important fiduciary position, particularly as one of the few things expressly stated in part of the power itself is the following sentence: ‘I also understand my limited power to use the donor’s property to benefit persons other than the donor.”

Judges:

Jules Sher QC

Citations:

[2000] 1 All ER 175, [2002] MHLR 411, [2000] Ch 343, [2000] 3 WLR 45

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – X v Y, Z sub nom In re E (Enduring power of attorney) ChD 18-Feb-2000
The application was an appeal against an order registering an enduring power of attorney. The appeal from Master Lush was by way of rehearing. The donor had executed two powers. The second was invalid, and the donees of the first power sought to . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Agency

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.183097

Malette v Shulman Jobes, In re: 1990

‘The right to determine what shall be done with one’s own body is a fundamental right in our society. The concepts inherent in this right are the bedrock upon which the principles of self-determination and individual autonomy are based. Free individual choice in matters affecting this right should, in my opinion, be accorded very high priority.’

Judges:

Robins JA

Citations:

(1990) 67 DLR (4th) 321, (1987) 529 A 2d 434

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland CA 9-Dec-1992
The official Solicitor appealed against a decision that doctors could withdraw medical treatment including artificial nutrition, from a patient in persistent vegetative state.
Held: The doctors sought permission to act in accordance with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.180674

Bullmore and Another v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust: Admn 9 Jul 2007

Challenge to Trust’s decision to close local hospital.

Judges:

Walker J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1636 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Bullmore, Regina (on the Application of) v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust CA 8-Jun-2007
Renewed application for protective costs order. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Buglife – The Invertebrate Conservation Trust, Regina (on the Application of) v Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corp CA 4-Nov-2008
The court considered an application for a protective costs order in judicial review proceedings in environmental law cases.
Held: The central decision was Corner House Research, but that was to be applied purposively and not rigidly. It was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.254500

SLL v Priory Health Care And, Secretary of State for Justice: UTAA 18 Oct 2019

Mental Health – Restricted Patient – where at least one of s.72(1)(b) criteria not met what is proper test for deciding whether the discharge should be absolute or conditional? What factors must the Tribunal consider when assessing whether it is ‘appropriate’ for the patient to continue to be liable to recall to hospital for further treatment?

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 323 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.651664

B v Romania (No 2): ECHR 19 Feb 2013

ECHR Article 8
Positive obligations
Article 8-1
Respect for family life
Respect for private life
Lack of adequate legal protection in a case concerning a mother’s committal to a psychiatric institution and the placement of her children in care: violations
Facts – The applicant was assisted by the social services from 1996 onwards, having been classified as a disabled person unfit to work. In 2000 she was diagnosed with ‘paranoid schizophrenia’. Two of her children were minors at the time. No measure of guardianship or administration was ever introduced for the applicant or her children. Since 2000 she has been admitted on numerous occasions to psychiatric institutions, after being taken there by the police. Her children have not been living with her; instead they were placed in residential care for abandoned children.
Law – Article 8
(a) The applicant’s confinement – In most of the cases previously heard by the Court concerning ‘persons of unsound mind’, the domestic proceedings concerning psychiatric confinement had been examined under Article 5 of the Convention. Consequently, in order to determine whether the confinement in the present case had complied with Article 8 of the Convention, the Court found it appropriate to refer, mutatis mutandis, to its case-law under Article 5 ss 1 (e).
Despite the fact that the law on the protection of disabled persons imposed an obligation to introduce a legal protection measure, in the form of guardianship or administration, no such measure had been adopted in respect of the applicant, even though her state of health had been known to the authorities well before the beginning of her periods of confinement. Her vulnerability had also been noted and brought to the attention of the domestic courts by numerous reports of the social services. But neither the social services nor the courts had drawn any conclusions as regards the legal protection of the applicant herself. It was precisely the shortcomings of the authorities which had contributed to depriving her of the guarantees available under mental-health legislation, in particular the right for the patient to be assisted when giving consent or the obligation to notify the patient’s legal representative of the measure of confinement and the reasons for its adoption. Recent amendments to mental-health legislation provided that if the patient had no legal representative and was unable to appoint one on account of mental incapacity, the hospital would be required to notify the relevant local authority promptly so that legal protection measures could be put in place. However, those new provisions had not benefited the applicant. The provisions of domestic law governing psychiatric confinement and the protection of persons unable to look after their own interests had not been applied to the applicant in the spirit of her right to respect for her private life under Article 8. The authorities had thus failed in their obligation to take appropriate measures for the defence of the applicant’s interests.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously).
(b) Placement of the applicant’s children in care – It was because of the lack of special protection for the applicant, who, in particular, was not assigned a lawyer during the placement proceedings or any guardian ad litem, that she had not been able to participate effectively in the proceedings concerning the placement of her children or to have her interests defended. In addition, her family situation had been examined on only two occasions in a period of twelve years. Lastly, there was no evidence that the social workers had maintained the regular contact with the applicant that would have afforded a good opportunity to make her views known to the authorities. For those reasons, the decision-making process leading to the placement of the applicant’s two minor children had not been conducted in compliance with her rights as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously).
Article 41: EUR 10,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

Citations:

1285/03 – Legal Summary, [2013] ECHR 393

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Human Rights, Children, Health

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.491921

PC and Another v City of York Council: CA 1 May 2013

It had been decided that PC, a 43 year old woman, had capacity to marry, but the LA now argued that she did not have the capacity to decide to live with her partner, a man who had old convictions for serious sexual assault.
Held: Decisions as to the existence of capacity was always specific to the situation and the particular factual matrix and the context.

Judges:

Richards, McFarlane, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 478, (2013) 16 CCL Rep 298, [2014] 2 WLR 1, [2013] WLR(D) 176, [2013] Med LR 213, [2014] 1 FAM 10

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Mental Capacity Act 2005 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Sheffield City Council v E; Re E (An Alleged Patient) FD 2-Dec-2004
The council sought an order to prevent E, a patient from contracting a marriage which it considered unwise. As a preliminary issue the parties sought guidance as to the questions to be put to the expert as to capacity.
Held: The woman suffered . .
Cited – Local Authority X v MM and Another; re MM (An Adult) FD 21-Aug-2007
The test for capacity to consent to sexual relations must be the same in its essentials as the test in the criminal law; more importantly ‘a woman either has capacity, for example, to consent to ‘normal’ penetrative vaginal intercourse, or she does . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Family

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.491839

Re CR: CoP 12 Mar 2021

whether it is in the best interests of CR to have a declaration made to enable the Applicant (‘the CCG’) to administer a vaccination to CR against Covid 19. There is no dispute that CR does not have the capacity to make this decision himself.

Judges:

His Honour Judge Butler

Citations:

[2021] EWCOP 19

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.662223

Ali Raja and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Redbridge: Admn 5 Jun 2020

Case about the night-time care needs of two adult brothers with severe physical and learning disabilities. It is about whether the sole justifiable response for the local authority to adopt was to provide additional care and support pending a full needs reassessment.

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1456 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Health

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.651200

South West Yorkshire Mental Health NHS Trust v Bradford Crown Court: Admn 27 Mar 2003

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 640 (Admin), [2003] ACD 68

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.263504

Juncal, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and others: Admn 19 Dec 2007

The claimant sought damages, saying that he had been unlawfully detained when found unfit to plead in 1997.
Held: The claim failed. (a) The 1964 Act, and its Scottish equivalent, did not authorise anything that was arbitrary. (b) It followed that Parliament did not, by the 1986 Order, pass subordinate legislation which authorised arbitrary detention at hospital. (c) It was clear from Dr Gray’s report to the Belfast Crown Court that the appellant’s compulsory hospitalisation was justified. No other interpretation of the report, when read as a whole, was tenable. (d) The subsequent transfers were lawful in terms of the legislation which authorised them. The key statutory word was ‘corresponding’ and the statutory provisions dealing with fitness to plea in the different parts of the United Kingdom came within that definition. (e) The appellant’s detention at hospital throughout the period of detention has been lawfully authorised by relevant domestic legislation. (f) The 1998 Act did not operate retrospectively and events at the Belfast Crown Court in 1997 could not be challenged under article 6 of the Convention.

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 3024 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5, Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 81(1), Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Health

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.262947

Smithkline Beecham Plc and Advertising Standards Authority: Admn 21 Dec 2000

The appellants sold a soft drink. They advertised it using a toothbrush as part of the image. They also said ‘Ribena Toothkind does not encourage tooth decay’, and cited support from the British Dental Association. The Authority held that this suggested that the drink had health giving qualities, and banned the advertisements. The company appealed. The Authority relied on a report by an expert who had allied himself with complainants against the company beforehand.
Held: The independence of experts in such procedures is vital. The person of whom complaint was made acted as a consultee only. This court must act as the hypothetical observer, the reasonable man, and assess whether in any case there has in fact been a real danger, risk or possibility of unjust bias. There was no such risk apparent here. The adjudication stood.

Judges:

Mr Justice Hunt

Citations:

[2000] EWHC Admin 442

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Locabail (UK) Ltd v Bayfield Properties Ltd and Others (No 3) ChD 29-Feb-2000
It can be proper to award costs against a third party to an action where his behaviour had fallen short of strictly maintaining the action. Here a husband had funded his wife’s defence knowing that she would be unable to support any order for costs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Health

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.140259

Singh, Regina (on the Application Of) v Stratford Magistrates Court: Admn 3 Jul 2007

The defendant appealed the decision of the district judge when adjourning his case for a second psychiatric report with a view to hispossible committal to hospital, saying that this would deprive him of his right to a trial.
Held: In cases alleged insanity either at the time of the offence or at trial, the magistrates had power to make a committal order rather than to proceed to a verdict.

Judges:

Hughes LJ, Treacy J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1582 (Admin), Times 13-Aug-2007, [2007] 1 WLR 3119, [2008] 1 Cr App R 2, [2007] 4 All ER 407

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 37(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Magistrates

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.254480

Clitheroe v Bond: ChD 21 May 2020

family dispute between the Claimant brother and Defendant sister as to whether their mother, the deceased, had testamentary capacity to make each of her two wills and in addition or in the alternative whether either or both wills resulted from fraudulent calumny.

Judges:

Deputy Master Linwood

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1185 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Wills and Probate

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.650956

N, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: CA 24 Jul 2009

A challenge was made to the ban on smoking at a secure hospital.

Judges:

Lord Clarke MR, Keene, Moses LJJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 795, [2010] PTSR 674, [2009] HRLR 31

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention ofHuman Rights 8 14

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Black, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 19-Dec-2017
The Court was asked whether the Crown is bound by the prohibition of smoking in most enclosed public places and workplaces, contained in Chapter 1 of Part 1 of the Health Act 2006.
Held: However reluctantly, the claimant’s appeal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health, Prisons

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.443757

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 released the detention was re-instated, and the patient again complained at proposals to treat him against his will. He appealed the second order for his detention.
Held: The condition would have periods of remission. In case of medical necessity, treatment against the wishes of a patient did not infringe his human rights. The degree of necessity had been shown in this case. There was still required a genuinely independent assessment.

Judges:

Lord Phillips CJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 28, Times 02-Feb-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 810

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 37 41, European Convention on Human Rights 3 8 14

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – 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 Dr SS and others Admn 31-Jan-2005
The claimant was a mental patient detained for a bipolar dis-order after convictions for rape. . .
Cited – In re MB (Medical Treatment) CA 26-Mar-1997
The patient was due to deliver a child. A delivery by cesarean section was necessary, but the mother had a great fear of needles, and despite consenting to the operation, refused the necessary consent to anesthesia in any workable form.
Held: . .
Cited – 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 – 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 – Ladd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
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 – 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 – Nevmerzhitsky v Ukraine ECHR 5-Apr-2005
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violations of Art. 3 (on account of torture and degrading treatment); Violation of Art. 5-1 (c); Violations of Art. 5-3 (on account of the lack of prompt judicial . .
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 – 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 – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.238128

Re P (Discharge of Party): CA 16 Apr 2021

Appeal against two orders made in proceedings in the Court of Protection about a highly vulnerable 19-year-old woman, P. The appellant is P’s mother who was joined as a respondent to the proceedings at their inception. By the first order, the judge, Hayden J, the Vice-President of the Court, discharged the appellant as a party to the proceedings. By the second order the judge adjourned the appellant’s application inviting him to provide a judgment setting out his reasons for discharging her as a party.

Citations:

[2021] EWCA Civ 512

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.662140

Bagguley v E: CoP 25 Oct 2019

Application on behalf of Richard Bagguley, the Property and Affairs Deputy (The Deputy) for E, seeking authority for buccal cell samples to be taken from E for the purposes of DNA testing. The objective is to establish whether or not E is the father of each or any of three individuals D, P and A who are all adults. E is seventy-six years of age suffering from end stage severe dementia.

Judges:

Mr Justice Hayden

Citations:

[2019] EWCOP 49, [2019] WLR(D) 604, [2020] 2 WLR 236

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Agency, Health

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.642853