header-logo header-logo

Mental health & the case for tribunals

06 October 2017 / Keith Wilding
Issue: 7764 / Categories: Features , Mental health
printer mail-detail
nlj_7764_wilding

Keith Wilding believes there is much to recommend an expansion of the tribunal adjudication system

  • Current safeguarding laws are fragmented and complex.
  • The Law Commission has recommended a review of deprivation of liberty safeguards.

In May 2017, the Prime Minister suggested that the ‘flawed’ Mental Health Act 1983 should be replaced. The 1983 Act is only one aspect of legislation in the area of law dealing with matters of mental health, mental incapacity, and vulnerability.

The Law Commission’s final report on Mental Capacity and Deprivation of Liberty (Law Comm No 372 (Summary)) in discussing the rights of challenge to authorisations of deprivations of liberty recommends (at para 86) reviewing the question of the appropriate judicial body for determining such challenges. This seems to be a clear indication that the role of the First-tier Tribunal (a mental health tribunal) should be considered as the forum for such adjudication. There is much to recommend an expansion of the tribunal adjudication system both from the perspective of the person in respect

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

DAC Beachcroft—Ben Daniels

DAC Beachcroft—Ben Daniels

Firm elects new senior partner to lead next phase of growth

Taylor Rose—Amarjit Ryatt

Taylor Rose—Amarjit Ryatt

Partner appointed head of family and divorce

Browne Jacobson—Adam Berry & Adam Culy

Browne Jacobson—Adam Berry & Adam Culy

Financial and professional risks team expand with dual partner hire

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll