header-logo header-logo

Human rights detention breach

20 January 2011
Issue: 7449 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Court of Appeal allows appeal against detention under Mental Health Act
A man who was accused of stalking women and then detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 (the 1983 Act) has succeeded in his human rights claim.

The case, TTM v London Borough of Hackney and Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 4, concerned a Lithuanian national who was originally admitted to Homerton Hospital under s 2 of the 1983 Act for assessment and was subsequently detained under s 3 of the Act for treatment. His brother, who was his nearest living relative, initially recognised that M needed treatment but later objected to his detention. However, the Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) did not inform the hospital managers because she honestly believed his objection had been withdrawn.

Under the 1983 Act, an AMHP may not make a s 3 application if the nearest relative has raised an objection. If that happens then different procedures for detention must be followed.

The Court of Appeal allowed the man’s appeal, finding that he was lawfully detained but later wrongfully deprived

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll