2016
|
|
Cases Reported |
| DD v Home Secretary (Preliminary Hearing) | 1 |
| Issue: Whether restrictions under a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure breached Art 3 ECHR in light of their impact on the mental health of the subject. | |
| DD v Home Secretary (Full Hearing) | 18 |
| Issue: Whether restrictions under a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure breached Art 3 ECHR in light of their impact on the mental health of the subject. | |
| R v Michael James Brennan (Conviction) | 33 |
| Issue: "Whether the jury had been entitled to reject uncontested expert evidence that a killing occurred in circumstances of diminished responsibility. " | |
| R v Michael James Brennan (Sentence) | 45 |
| Issue: The appropriate sentence for a defendant who was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility whose mental health had responded to treatment such that a hospital disposal was not appropriate; recommended licence conditions. | |
| Marc Martin Wells, Sarfraz Masud, Susan Hone, Tony Nicholas Alan Kail v R | 49 |
| Issue: "When on a trial of the facts of a defendant found unfit to stand trial there could be investigation of the state of mind of the defendant on the basis of objective evidence; what counted as objective evidence; whether correct rulings had been made on severance and the admissibility of evidence. " | |
| R v Harold Chinegwundoh | 60 |
| Issue: "Whether a restraining order under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 could be made following a finding that the defendant who was unfit to stand trial committed the act alleged; correcting a supervision order that named a doctor and not a local authority. " | |
| R v Altaf Ahmed | 63 |
| Issue: Whether a judge had incorrectly refused to admit evidence in a trial of the facts of a defendant found unfit to stand trial. | |
| R v S | 65 |
| Issue: Whether leave to appeal findings of unfitness to stand trial and that the acts were committed should be granted; the lack of a power to remit for trial if no restriction order is made; the correct approach to a change in circumstances when an indefinite Sexual Offences Prevention Order has been made. | |
| R v Lucinda Vowles, Carl Barnes, Danielle Victoria Coleman, Justin Obuza Odiowei, David Stuart Irving, Gordon McDougall; R (Lucinda Vowles) v Secretary of State for Justice and Parole Board | 66 |
| Issue: Whether indeterminate sentences of imprisonment should be replaced by orders under ss37/41 Mental Health Act 1983 in light of updated medical evidence; whether Art 5(4) ECHR required the release of a person serving an indeterminate sentence and transferred to hospital to be controlled by 1 body; whether delays in the hearing of a matter by the Parole Board breached Art 5(4). | |
| Attorney-General’s Reference No 122 of 2014 (Digest) | 98 |
| Issue: The impact of mental disorder on an arguably unduly lenient sentence for sexual offending. | |
| R (P) v Derby Youth Court | 100 |
| Issue: Whether matters against a juvenile who was unfit to stand trial should have been committed for trial in the Crown Court. | |
| R v Darren Marshall | 102 |
| Issue: Whether a hospital order was the most suitable disposal rather than a suspended sentence of imprisonment. | |
| R v Fausto Graciano | 104 |
| Issue: Whether a sentence of life imprisonment plus a hospital and limitation direction under s45A Mental Health Act 1983 should be replaced by orders under ss37/41 of the 1983 Act. | |
| Yaikov v Russia | 108 |
| Issue: Whether detention in hospital based on evidence that was not current breached Art 5 ECHR. | |
| Terry Dunnage v Kathleen Bernadette Randall and UK Insurance Ltd | 117 |
| Issue: "Whether the judge had erred in concluding that a man with schizophrenia who set fire to himself was not liable in tort to a rescuer because his conduct was driven by his illness. " | |
| R v Stefan Martens | 136 |
| Issue: Whether a custodial sentence together with a hospital direction under s45A Mental Health Act 1983 was proper when the medical evidence supported orders under ss37/41 of the 1983 Act in light, inter alia, of evidence that the offending would not have happened but for the mental disorder and that the defendant’s mental health would deteriorate if he was transferred to prison. | |
| R v Edward Brown (formerly Latham) | 142 |
| Issue: "Whether a conviction was unsafe because the defendant’s conferences at court with his lawyers had been conducted in the presence of nursing staff in light of the risk he posed to himself and others, thereby breaching legal professional privilege. " | |
| BG v Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland and Mark Mcilwraith, Mental Health Officer | 152 |
| Issue: Whether a care plan for a patient with dementia included treatment for mental disorder; whether reasons given by a Tribunal were adequate. | |
| Case No HM/0339/2015 | 159 |
| Issue: Whether a decision by Tribunal staff to allow a patient to withdraw his application was defective; whether a decision by a Tribunal judge to set aside the decision of the staff member was defective. | |
| R (Cornwall Council) v Secretary of State for Health; R (Cornwall Council) v Somerset County Council | 164 |
| Issue: The ordinary residence of an adult without capacity who had been accommodated in specialist foster care during his childhood. | |
| PJ v (1) A Local Health Board (2) The Welsh Ministers (3) The Health Department | 178 |
| Issue: Whether a Tribunal was correct not to consider whether the conditions of a Community Treatment Order breached Art 5 ECHR; the role of arguments under the ECHR in Tribunal proceedings. | |
| MM v (1) WL Clinic and (2) MHU | 198 |
| Issue: Whether a restricted patient with capacity could consent to a conditional discharge that involved a deprivation of liberty. | |
| AM v Partnerships in Care Ltd and Secretary of State for Justice | 214 |
| Issue: The role of factual findings in relation to risk assessment; whether a Tribunal had made a factual error in reaching conclusions of fact; the adequacy of reasons relating to findings of fact. | |
| R v Luke Clark | 219 |
| Issue: Whether the oral medical evidence necessary before a restriction order under s41 Mental Health Act 1983 was imposed could be given by telephone; whether the restriction order was necessary. | |
| R (Claire Dyer) (by her mother and litigation friend Catherine Dyer) v (1) The Welsh Ministers, (2) Abertawe Bro Morgannwg, University Health Board, (3) Welsh Health Specialised Services Committee | 223 |
| Issue: Whether there was an unlawful failure by the authorities to provide low secure mental health facilities so that the needs of the claimant would not involve her placement a significant distance away from her home. | |
| WH v Llanarth Court Hospital (Partnerships in Care) | 245 |
| Issue: Whether a Tribunal decision should be quashed on the basis that the appropriate treatment test was not met; which hospital had to be considered for the purposes of that test; the adequacy of the Tribunal’s reasons. | |
| R v Robert Marcantonio; R v Dick Chitolie | 252 |
| Issue: Whether a plea of guilty and a finding of guilt should be quashed in light of subsequent evidence that a defendant had not been fit to stand trial. | |
| RP v Dudley & Walsall Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust and The Secretary of State for Justice | 270 |
| Issue: Whether maintaining a conditional discharge breached Art 8 ECHR. | |
| (1) South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (2) Dr Whitworth v The Hospital Managers of St George’s Hospital, AU as Interested Party | 273 |
| Issue: Whether a Trust could challenge a decision of hospital managers to discharge a detained patient; whether the managers had to take into account a recent Tribunal decision to uphold detention; the adequacy of the reasons and rationality of the decision of the managers. | |
| Saber Mohammed Ali Ahmed v R | 282 |
| Issue: Whether orders under ss37 and 41 Mental Health Act 1983 should be made in place of life imprisonment in light of further medical evidence. | |
| R v Patrick Neale Orr | 287 |
| Issue: Whether a conviction was safe in light of evidence of unfitness to stand trial; the relationship between not making an adverse inference direction and the process of determining fitness to stand trial. | |
| Kronfeldner v Germany | 292 |
| Issue: Whether a statutory extension of the maximum period of preventive detention breached Art 5 ECHR; whether a dissocial personality disorder was within Art 5(1)(e); the impact of Art 46. | |
| B v Germany | 307 |
| Issue: Whether the imposition of preventive detention at the end of a sentence of imprisonment and based on the risk of offending by a person with a personality disorder breached Art 5 ECHR. | |
| S v Germany | 321 |
| Issue: Whether the imposition of preventive detention at the end of a period of detention in hospital after being found not criminally responsible and based on the risk of offending by a person with a personality disorder breached Art 5 ECHR; the impact of Art 46. | |
| Glien v Germany | 338 |
| Issue: Whether preventive detention on the basis of risk arising from personality disorder breached Art 5 ECHR when it was directed to be served in a prison; whether a psychopathic and dissocial personality disorder was within Art 5(1)(e); whether a statutory extension of the maximum period of preventive detention breached Art 7. | |
| Bergmann v Germany | 356 |
| Issue: Whether restrictions on the criteria for preventive detention and requirements as to the regime applicable, including the need for mental disorder and a treatment plan, meant that its retrospective extension breached Arts 5 and/or 7 ECHR; whether a personality disorder involving sexual sadism was within Art 5(1)(e). | |
| Bljakaj and Others v Croatia | 379 |
| Issue: Whether the failure to prevent a killing by a mentally disordered man breached Art 2 ECHR; whether the failure to grant a remedy in domestic proceedings breached Art 13. | |
| A v Slovakia | 402 |
| Issue: Whether the failure to take steps to counter domestic violence, including enforcing orders made for psychiatric treatment for the assailant’s various disorders that were implicated in the violence, breached the victim’s rights under Art 8 ECHR; whether there was a breach of Art 14 arising from the approach to domestic violence. | |
| Hajduová v Slovakia | 417 |
| Issue: Whether the failure to detain a domestic violence victim’s husband for psychiatric treatment, such that more violence was threatened, breached the victim’s rights under Art 8 ECHR. | |
| R v Frederick Semanshia | 425 |
| Issue: Whether a sentence of imprisonment for public protection should be replaced by orders under ss37/41 Mental Health Act 1983 in light of fresh evidence. | |
View as
Sort by
Display
per page
