The claimant suffered severe brain injury in a crash. The parties sought guidance form the court as to his legal capacity.
Held: The fact that a party may be particularly susceptible to exploitation was a relevant element when considering his capacity to act, though alone it would not usually be enough to find a lack of capacity. In this case the claimant was declared to be a patient within the Act and the Rules.
Judges:
Stanley Burnton J
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 2895 (QB), Times 08-Dec-2006
Links:
Statutes:
Mental Health Act 1983, Civil Procedure Rules 21
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – 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 by:
Cited – Maga v The Trustees of The Birmingham Archdiocese of The Roman Catholic Church CA 16-Mar-2010
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for damages after alleging sexual abuse by a catholic priest. The judge had found the church not vicariously liable for the injuries, and that the archdiocese had not been under a duty further to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Health, Litigation Practice
Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.246082