header-logo header-logo

16 February 2011 / Mark Mullins
Issue: 7453 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

A liberty worth defending

Mark Mullins reports on unlawful detention

On the 30 January 2009 an approved mental health professional (AMHP) working for the London Borough of Hackney made an application for the compulsory admission to hospital, under s 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA 1983), of M, a painter and decorator. Her application stated that she had consulted with M’s brother (his “nearest relative”) and that he did not object.

The procedure for compulsory admission under MHA 1983  says that a s 3 application “may not be made” if the “nearest relative” objects (s 11(4)(a)). An application “which appears to be duly made” may be acted upon by hospital managers without further proof of any fact or opinion in it and gives a hospital legal authority to detain and treat a patient (s 6(3)).

The AMHP’s application was accepted and M was detained in the hospital trust’s hospital.

Habeas corpus proceedings

Habeas corpus proceedings brought urgently in the Administrative Court were decided on 11 February 2009. Burton J. heard oral evidence from M’s brother

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

Bellevue Law—Sara Mason

Bellevue Law—Sara Mason

Bellevue Law expands workplace law offering with specialist healthcare regulatory appointment

Seddons GSC—Peter Ames

Seddons GSC—Peter Ames

Seddons GSC strengthens Dispute Resolution team with partner hire

Taylor Rose—four promotions

Taylor Rose—four promotions

Taylor Rose announces partner promotions

NEWS
Pressure is mounting for a dedicated UK AI law, but deciding what it should achieve remains the central challenge
Legal professional privilege has checked the SRA’s investigative powers, exposing difficult questions about tackling suspected abusive litigation
Refusing mediation need not trigger a costs penalty, but litigators must justify their position
Group claims, disputed costs and judicial recruitment dominate the latest courtroom round-up
Landlords face fresh registration duties as procedural reforms reshape the civil courts
back-to-top-scroll