header-logo header-logo

19 October 2012
Issue: 7534 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Mental Health

R (on the application of Sunderland City Council) v South Tyneside Council [2012] EWCA Civ 1232, [2012] All ER (D) 97 (Oct)

The test set out in Shah v Barnet London Borough Council [1983] 1 All ER 226 was not a helpful guide to the meaning of “is resident” in s 117(3) of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA 1983). That was because the circumstances to which the test of ordinary residence was to be applied under the Education Act 1962 were very different from those in which s 117(3) of MHA 1983 had to be considered. Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council [2002] 1 All ER 176 was more helpful and relevant. It was clear that, for the purposes of s 117 of MHA 1983, a person could not have more than one residence, whereas for other legislative purposes the person in question could be resident in two different places at the same time. In general, when considering any case in which there was doubt as to the place of a person’s residence,

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll