2001
|
|
Cases Reported |
| R v Royland Richard Williams | 1 |
| Issue: The length of suspension of a custodial sentence in light of the psychiatric condition of the Appellant. | |
| R v Dean Cooper | 2 |
| Issue: Whether a hospital order under s37 Mental Health Act 1983 should be imposed; the powers of the Court of Appeal to make an interim hospital order under s38 of the Act. | |
| CW v AW (remand for medical reports) | 4 |
| Issue: Whether the 12 week time limit imposed under s35 Mental Health Act 1983 for the preparation of medical reports applied when the sentencing court was acting under s48 of the Family Law Act 1996 to obtain reports to assist with sentencing for contempt of court. | |
| R (On the Application of Epsom & St Helier NHS Trust) v Mental Health Review Tribunal | 8 |
| Issue: Whether the Tribunal was entitled to conclude that a patient was not appropriately liable to be detained when, although she had not received any treatment in hospital since her treatment order under s3 Mental Health Act 1983 had been renewed, treatment at some stage in the future was likely. | |
| R (On the Application of Wheldon) v Rampton Hospital Authority | 19 |
| Issue: Whether the treatability test was met in relation to a patient suffering from psychopathic disorder. | |
| R (On the Application of K) v Camden and Islington Health Authority | 24 |
| Issue: Whether a local health authority was obliged to provide psychiatric supervision to a restricted patient to allow a Tribunal ordered conditional discharge to put into effect. | |
| R (On the Application of Von B) v (1) East London and the City Mental Health NHS Trust and (2) Snazell | 36 |
| Issue: Whether a patient who had been discharged from detention under the Mental Health Act 1983 by a Mental Health Review Tribunal could be placed under detention again by the relevant professionals despite the Tribunal decision. | |
| R v Paul Lee Smith | 46 |
| Issue: Whether the judge was right to reject investigating further a disposal under the Mental Health Act 1983 because there was no link between the offence and the mental disorder of the Appellant. | |
| R (On the Application of H) v Mental Health Review Tribunal, North and East London Region | 48 |
| Issue: Whether s73 Mental Health Act 1983 is compatible with Art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. | |
| R v Mark Gordon Simmonds | 54 |
| Issue: Whether life imprisonment was proper for an offence of arson committed by a defendant suffering from psychopathic disorder who did not meet the criteria for a disposal under the Mental Health Act 1983 | |
| R v Alfred Brewah | 59 |
| Issue: Whether a disposal under the Mental Health Act 1983 was appropriate in light of further medical evidence. | |
| R (On the Application of Wirral Health Authority and Wirral Borough Council) v (1) Mental Health Review Tribunal (2) Dr Finnegan; DE as Interested Party | 66 |
| Issue: (i) Whether a Tribunal decision to discharge was rational; (ii) Whether a doctor’s decision to discharge a patient was lawful. | |
| R (On the Application of N) v Ashworth Hospital and Secretary of State for Health | 77 |
| Issue: Whether the policy of randomly monitoring telephone calls by patients at a High Security hospital breached Art 8 European Convention. | |
| R (On the Application of C & Others) v Brent, Kensington & Chelsea and Westminster Mental Health NHS Trust | 85 |
| Issue: Whether the closure of a home breached the patients’ legitimate expectations or rights under Art 8 European Convention. | |
| R v Sean Peter Colohan | 91 |
| Issue: Whether the mens rea of harassment should take into account the defendant’s mental disorder. | |
| R v Senad Bunjo | 94 |
| Issue: Whether a custodial sentence was necessary in relation to a robbery committed by an offender suffering from depression at the time of the offence. | |
| R v Jodie Blackford | 98 |
| Issue: Whether a custodial sentence was needed for an aggravated arson committed by a defendant suffering from depression. | |
| R (On the Application of C) v Secretary of State for the Home Department | 100 |
| Issue: The test to be applied by the Home Secretary in determining whether to refer a case back to a Tribunal under s71 Mental Health Act 1983 following a Tribunal decision to discharge a patient. | |
| R (On the Application of C) v Mental Health Review Tribunal, London South and South West Region | 110 |
| Issue: Whether listing a Mental Health Review Tribunal in relation to a patient detained under s3 Mental Health Act 1983 8 weeks after the application was in breach of Art 5(4) European Convention on Human Rights. | |
| DN v Switzerland | 117 |
| Issue: Whether Art 5(4) European Convention was breached if a doctor who examined a patient was a member of the court which determined the lawfulness of detention. | |
| PW v UK | 125 |
| Issue: Whether a friendly settlement in relation to compensation for the delay in holding a Tribunal should be approved. | |
| R (on the Application of Hession) v Health Service Commissioner for Wales | 126 |
| Issue: Whether a consultant psychiatrist could be required to answer questions about the care of a patient who committed a double murder shortly after release. | |
| R (On the Application of P) v Surrey Oaklands NHS Trust | 135 |
| Issue: Whether judicial review was an appropriate remedy in relation to a decision as to where to place a severely disabled patient on the closure of a long-stay hospital. | |
| R v Rebecca Budgen | 138 |
| Issue: Whether a custodial sentence or a hospital order was appropriate on the facts. | |
| R (On the Application of F) v (1) Oxfordshire Mental Healthcare NHS Trust (2) Oxfordshire NHS Health Authority | 140 |
| Issue: Whether a decision not to provide funds for an out of area medium secure placement was unlawful; the procedures to be followed in making the decision. | |
| Rutten v Netherlands | 155 |
| Issue: Whether the determination of a request to extend a detention order on the basis of the risk posed to the public after the previous order had expired breached Art 5 European Convention. | |
| Christopher Clunis v UK | 162 |
| Issue: Whether the failure to arrange aftercare for a patient who committed a homicide when his mental state deteriorated breached Art 8 European Convention; whether the striking out of his tort claim against the aftercare authorities breached Art 6 European Convention. | |
| Re AR (Habeas Corpus: Medical Recommendation) | 175 |
| Issue: Whether a general practitioner had previous acquaintance with a patient so as to allow the completion of a medical recommendation to detain her. | |
| R v M, K and H | 177 |
| Issue: Whether the procedure for determining whether a defendant found not fit to stand trial committed the actus reus was compatible with Art 6 European Convention. | |
| R (On the Application of WC) v (1) South London & Maudsley NHS Trust (2) David Orekeye | 187 |
| Issue: Whether a detention under the Mental Health Act 1983 was valid: whether the correct person was consulted as nearest relative. | |
| R v Eric Sylvester Martin | 191 |
| Issue: Whether a custodial sentence was appropriate in light of the medical evidence. | |
| Anderson, Reid and Doherty v Scottish Ministers and Advocate General for Scotland | 192 |
| Issue: Whether the provisions of the Mental Health (Public Safety and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 1999, which allow the detention in hospital of patients who are not treatable, and who could not therefore be admitted to hospital, but who require detention to prevent a risk of serious harm to the public, are in breach of Art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. | |
| Reid v UK | 210 |
| Issue: Whether the continued detention of a patient suffering from psychopathic disorder on the grounds of public safety, whereas initial detention required that the order be treatable, was a breach of Art 5 European Convention; whether the proceedings were conducted speedily. | |
| De Taranto v Cornelius | 217 |
| Issue: Whether the distribution of a medico-legal report commissioned for legal proceedings to the Claimant’s GP and a consultant psychiatrist, which contained defamatory and confidential material, gave rise to damages for defamation and/or breach of confidence. | |
| R (On the Application of John Wilkinson) v (1) The RMO, Broadmoor Hospital (2) The SOAD, Mental Health Act Commission (3) Secretary of State for Health | 224 |
| Issue: The process to be followed by the SOAD and the Court on judicial review when it was alleged that treatment without consent breached a psychiatric patient’s human rights. | |
| R (On the Application of RH) v Ashworth Hospital Authority | 241 |
| Issue: Whether the hospital policy of not allowing condoms to be issued to patients was lawful in light of the European Convention. | |
| Attorney-General’s Reference No 83 of 2001 (Stephen David Fidler) | 266 |
| Issue: Whether a community rehabilitation order for an offence of robbery was unduly lenient in light of mitigating features, including mental illness. | |
| C v (1) South London and Maudsley Hospital NHS Trust (2) LB Lambeth | 269 |
| Issue: Whether a claim in false imprisonment for improper use of s2 Mental Health Act 1983 should be allowed to proceed. | |
| Brand v Netherlands | 275 |
| Issue: Whether lengthy detention in prison pending a place being found in a secure psychiatric institution breached Art 3 and/or Art 5 European Convention. | |
| R (On the Application of B) v Secretary of State for the Home Department | 283 |
| Issue: Whether a decision to recall a restricted patient to hospital at the end of a prison sentence was lawful. | |
| Bensaid v UK | 287 |
| Issue: Whether Arts 3, 8 and 13 European Convention would be breached by the deportation of a mentally ill man to Algeria. | |
View as
Sort by
Display
per page
