In the J T case the UK government had reached a friendly settlement under which it accepted that the United Kingdom law under sections 26 and 29 of the 1983 Act was an infringement of a patients human rights. It had been accepted that the legislation would need amendment, to allow a detainee exercising his right to apply to court to choose a diferent family member as his representative, but that had not yet happened.
Held: The right to make a declaration of incompatibility was discretionary, but the existence of a decision such as J T did not prevent a court exercising that discretion. The court made a declaration of incompatibility.
Judges:
Maurice Kay J
Citations:
Times 25-Apr-2003
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – J T v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Mar-2000
The applicants case was struck out after a friendly settlement under which the UK government undertook to seek to amend Mental Health legislation. Current law did not provide an opportunity for a detained person to apply to court to have substituted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Constitutional, Health
Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.181854
