Supreme Court suicide ruling

A hospital had a duty under human rights law to protect a severely depressed voluntary mental health patient who committed suicide, the Supreme Court has held.

The unanimous ruling means psychiatric patients at risk will be entitled to the same level of protection, whether they are detained under the Mental Health Act, or admit themselves voluntarily.

In Rabone & Anor v Pennine Care NHS Foundation [2012] UKSC 2, the justices held that Pennine breached Melanie Rathbone’s right to life under Art 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, by allowing her to leave hospital. After leaving, she committed suicide.

They concluded there had been a “real and immediate” risk of death, and that Art 2 created a duty on the state to take operational measures to protect a voluntary mental health patient against a “real and immediate” risk of suicide. They held that the parents of the deceased were “victims”, and therefore able to bring an action under s 7(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998.

On the issue of whether the parents had lost their “victims” status by agreeing to settle for £7,500 in an earlier civil claim they brought against Pennine, the justices unanimously held they had not.

Lord Dyson said two conditions must be met before the parents could lose their “victims” status—the public authority must make “adequate redress” and they must acknowledge their breach of Art 2. Lord Dyson said the claim was settled with the deceased’s estate and not with the parents themselves, and there was no “adequate redress”.

Gill Edwards, partner at Pannone, which acted for the Rabones, says the judgment provides more certainty for patients and families in similar circumstances. “It also has an impact on inquests in this country. It means that families of such patients will be entitled to ask for a more detailed Art 2 inquest to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death of their loved one.”