header-logo header-logo

12 September 2013
Issue: 7575 / Categories: Case law , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Mental health

A NHS Trust v Dr A [2013] EWHC 2442 (COP), [2013] All ER (D) 07 (Sep)

Generally, it was undesirable to extend the meaning of medical treatment under the Mental Health Act 1983 too far so as to bring about deprivation of liberty in respect of sectioned or sectionable patients beyond what was properly within the ambit of the Act. There was a recognisable need for identifying a clear dividing line between what was and what was not treatment for a mental disorder with the meaning of the Act, but in medicine, as in the law, it was not always possible to discern clear dividing lines. In case of uncertainty the appropriate course was for an application to be made to the court to approve the treatment. That approach ensured that the treatment given under s 63 would be confined to that which was properly within the definition of s 145.

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

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

From global fraud cases to fishing off-grid, Mishcon de Reya’s chair of dispute resolution Hugo Plowman discusses mentors, management switching off

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law announces partner promotion and new hires amid a record year for enquiries

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis wills and probate team extends reach with two appointments

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll