header-logo header-logo

11 April 2014
Issue: 7602 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Mental health—Admission for treatment—Approved mental health professionals

TW v Enfield Borough Council [2014] EWCA Civ 362, [2014] All ER (D) 292 (Mar)

Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Arden, Aikens and Clarke LJJ, 27 Mar 2014

The Court of Appeal has considered the test of “reasonably practicable” in s 11(4) of the Mental Health Act 1983. 

Michael Paget & Helen Curtis (instructed by DH Law Ltd) for W. Amanda Weston (instructed by London Borough of Enfield) for the authority.

The applicant, W, was an adult who suffered from obsessive compulsive disorder. She made clear that she did not wish to be admitted to hospital, nor did she want her family to be consulted by the medical team or for details of her condition to be given to them. An application was made by an approved social worker (ASW) employed by the respondent local authority for her compulsory admission to hospital pursuant to s 13(1) of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA 1983). Under the version of MHA 1983 in force at the time, the social worker was obliged to consult the person who appeared

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll