2008
|
|
Cases Reported |
| Kucheruk v Ukraine | 1 |
| Issue: Whether the treatment of a mentally-ill detainee breached Art 3 ECHR; whether detention was in breach of Art 5 ECHR | |
| G v Central & North West London Mental Health NHS Trust | 24 |
| Issue: Whether a decision to allow a patient leave from a psychiatric unit, during which she attempted to commit suicide, was negligent. | |
| R v Hurst | 43 |
| Issue: Whether a restriction order under s41 Mental Health Act 1983 was necessary. | |
| R v Ball | 48 |
| Issue: Whether a non-custodial sentence should have been imposed in light of the defendant’s mental health problems. | |
| Application by JR18 for Judicial Review | 50 |
| Issue: Whether it was lawful to provide nourishment to a patient on a hunger strike | |
| R v Jan | 52 |
| Issue: Whether a life sentence without a tariff was appropriate following a sustained campaign leading to serious offences of aggravated arson. | |
| Carlo Saulle (by his Litigation Friend) v Olivier Nouvet | 59 |
| Issue: Whether the claimant was a “protected party” and a “protected beneficiary” within CPR Part 21. | |
| Reid v HM Advocate | 71 |
| Issue: Whether a hospital disposal for culpable homicide should be replaced by an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment. | |
| R (Juncal) v Home Secretary, East London and the City Mental Health NHS Trust, The Scottish Ministers, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland | 79 |
| Issue: Whether detention imposed in Northern Ireland following a finding of unfitness to stand trial but without a finding that the accused committed the actus reus of the offence charged was lawful in domestic law; whether it was in breach of Art 5 ECHR. | |
| R v Sippings | 90 |
| Issue: Whether a custodial sentence was required for a man with mental health issues convicted of voyeurism | |
| R (M) v Homerton University Hospital | 92 |
| Issue: Whether detention under s3 following an interim displacement of the nearest relative under s29 was lawful. | |
| In the Matter of X | 97 |
| Issue: Whether a Tribunal decision not to release a patient should be quashed for applying the wrong test; the adequacy of the reasons. | |
| R v Singleton | 104 |
| Issue: Whether a sentence of imprisonment was proper in light of updated medical evidence | |
| In re BB; BB v Cygnet Healthcare | 106 |
| Issue: Whether there had been lawful consultation with a patient’s nearest relative before detention under s3 Mental Health Act 1983 was put into place. | |
| R (Secretary of State for Justice) v Mental Health Review Tribunal | 113 |
| Issue: Whether a Tribunal decision to discharge was adequately reasoned. | |
| R (Rayner) v Secretary of State for Justice | 115 |
| Issue: Whether the statutory scheme relating to the making of references to the Mental Health Review Tribunal following a recall to hospital of a conditionally discharged restricted patient and the timing of the hearing was compatible with Art 5(4) ECHR; whether anything other than an immediate reference by the Secretary of State would breach Art 5(4). | |
| R v Diamond | 124 |
| Issue: Whether the Court of Appeal should admit fresh evidence that the responsibility of an appellant convicted of murder was diminished at the time of the offence when he had refused to allow it to be investigated or raised at the time of the trial | |
| X v An NHS Trust | 139 |
| Issue: Whether X was lawfully detained under s37 Mental Health Act 1983, his placement in a hospital having occurred outside the 28 day period mentioned in the court order. | |
| R v Steward | 148 |
| Issue: Whether a Restriction Order was proper. | |
| R (G) v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, R (N) v Secretary of State for Health, R (B) v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust | 150 |
| Issue: Whether a ban on indoor smoking in a high secure hospital, where outdoor smoking was not practical, breached Arts 8 and/or 14 ECHR; whether a no-smoking policy was being applied inflexibly and so unlawfully. | |
| AK v Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust, RB of Kensington & Chelsea | 168 |
| Issue: Whether a claim in negligence and breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 arising from the alleged inadequacies of aftercare provision under s117 Mental Health Act 1983 should be struck out. | |
| Kerrie Francis Gray v Thames Trains Ltd and Network Rail | 180 |
| Issue: Whether a cause of action by a man suffering a mental disorder who committed a manslaughter was barred on public policy grounds. | |
| R v Murray | 191 |
| Issue: Whether a plea of guilty to murder should be set aside where the defendant’s mental illness had affected her judgment as to the correct plea | |
| R (Juncal) v Home Secretary, East London and the City Mental Health NHS Trust, The Scottish Ministers, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland | 193 |
| Issue: Whether detention imposed in Northern Ireland following a finding of unfitness to stand trial but without a finding that the accused committed the actus reus of the offence charged was lawful in domestic law; whether it was in breach of Art 5 ECHR. | |
| R v Grant | 203 |
| Issue: Whether a conviction should be quashed and replaced with a finding that a defendant was unfit to stand trial but did the act alleged. | |
| R v Norman | 206 |
| Issue: Whether the defendant committed the act charged, having been found unfit to stand trial; guidance on the procedure to be followed. | |
| R (Home Secretary) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (JC as Interested Party) | 212 |
| Issue: Whether a decision to grant a deferred conditional discharge was rational. | |
| Application by Brian McGee for Judicial Review | 216 |
| Issue: Whether a patient discharged by a Tribunal was lawfully re-detained; whether he was an “in-patient” for the purpose of a holding power. | |
| R v McDonagh | 219 |
| Issue: Whether a patient was severely mentally impaired. | |
| Mocarska v Poland | 228 |
| Issue: Whether the length of detention in prison pending transfer to hospital breached Art 5 ECHR. | |
| Pankiewicz v Poland | 233 |
| Issue: Whether the length of detention in prison pending transfer to hospital breached Art 5 ECHR. | |
| Shtukaturov v Russia | 238 |
| Issue: Whether proceedings depriving a person of his capacity breached Arts 6 and 8 ECHR; whether detention approved by a guardian breached Art 5 ECHR; whether treatment breached Art 3 ECHR. | |
| LB Ealing v KS and Others | 256 |
| Issue: Whether an adult had capacity in relation to various matters; what her best interests required. | |
| Re BJ | 274 |
| Issue: The appropriate review process when an adult was deprived of his liberty under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court. | |
| GD v Edgeware Community Hospital and LB Barnet | 282 |
| Issue: Whether there had been adequate consultation with a nearest relative prior to a s3 admission. | |
| IT v Secretary of State for Justice | 290 |
| Issue: Whether a warrant of recall was lawful | |
| Roberts v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust | 294 |
| Issue: Whether a psychologist’s report should be disclosed under the Data Protection Act 1998 to the patient about which it was written; whether it should be disclosed only to the patient’s solicitors. | |
| M v The Managers, Queen Mary’s Hospital (Administrative Court) | 303 |
| Issue: Whether a patient had been examined for the purposes of s12(1) Mental Health Act 1983 or interviewed for the purposes of s13(2) when she refused to cooperate with the professionals involved. | |
| M v The Managers, Queen Mary’s Hospital (Court of Appeal) | 306 |
| Issue: Whether a patient had been examined for the purposes of s12(1) Mental Health Act 1983 or interviewed for the purposes of s13(2) when she refused to cooperate with the professionals involved. | |
| R (B) v South Region Mental Health Review Tribunal | 312 |
| Issue: Whether a tribunal decision not to discharge was unlawful in light of it requesting that a nurse attend when the patient gave evidence, the short deliberation time at the end of a lengthy hearing, the failure to deal expressly with the question of a conditional discharge, and various criticisms of the decision. | |
| R v B, W, S, H and W | 320 |
| Issue: Whether there could be one jury to determine the guilt of some co-defendants and whether co-accused found not fit to stand trial had committed the actus reus elements of the offences; whether there should be one jury. | |
| R (Nottingham Healthcare NHS Trust) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (GK Interested Party) | 326 |
| Issue: Whether a tribunal decision to discharge a patient was adequately reasoned | |
| Renolde v France | 331 |
| Issue: Whether the failure to prevent the suicide of a mentally-ill prisoner breached Art 2 ECHR; whether a disciplinary punishment involving segregation breached Art 3. | |
| Cooke v DPP | 348 |
| Issue: Whether an ASBO should have been issued against a personality disordered offender. | |
| R (RD and PM) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions | 352 |
| Issue: Whether post-tariff life sentence prisoners transferred to hospital were entitled to income support. | |
| R (F) v Secretary of State for Justice (Administrative Court) | 361 |
| Issue: Whether a warrant issued under s47 Mental Health Act 1983 in respect of a psychopathically-disordered prisoner was valid in light of the absence of two medical opinions addressing the question of treatability; whether it should be quashed. | |
| R (F) v Secretary of State for Justice (Court of Appeal) | 370 |
| Issue: Whether a warrant issued under s47 Mental Health Act 1983 in respect of a psychopathically-disordered prisoner was valid in light of the absence of two medical opinions addressing the question of treatability; whether it should be quashed. | |
| R (DB) v Nottinghamshire Healthcase NHS Trust | 376 |
| Issue: Whether a patient was lawfully detained under s37 Mental Health Act 1983, his placement in a hospital having occurred outside the 28 day period mentioned in the court order. | |
View as
Sort by
Display
per page
