header-logo header-logo

07 May 2010
Issue: 7416 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Human rights

Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2010] EWHC 865 (QB), [2010] All ER (D) 196 (Apr)

There were two stages in the test defining the duty of the state under Art 2 to take steps to prevent persons killing themselves, specifically in the context of a detained patient in a mental hospital. The first was to decide whether the defendant had the requisite knowledge, actual or constructive, of a “real and immediate risk to life” from self harm. The second was whether the defendant failed to do all that could reasonably have been expected of it to avoid or prevent that risk.

The test depended not only on what the relevant authority had known but also what it ought to have known. The relevant knowledge was what they had known or ought to have known at the time and the court would have to warn itself against the dangers of hindsight. The authorities were clear that there was a high threshold to be crossed before the test was satisfied. The threshold that the claimant would have

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll