header-logo header-logo

12 September 2013
Issue: 7575 / Categories: Case law , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Mental health

A NHS Trust v Dr A [2013] EWHC 2442 (COP), [2013] All ER (D) 07 (Sep)

Generally, it was undesirable to extend the meaning of medical treatment under the Mental Health Act 1983 too far so as to bring about deprivation of liberty in respect of sectioned or sectionable patients beyond what was properly within the ambit of the Act. There was a recognisable need for identifying a clear dividing line between what was and what was not treatment for a mental disorder with the meaning of the Act, but in medicine, as in the law, it was not always possible to discern clear dividing lines. In case of uncertainty the appropriate course was for an application to be made to the court to approve the treatment. That approach ensured that the treatment given under s 63 would be confined to that which was properly within the definition of s 145.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll