Source: http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Category:2005_cases
Timestamp: 2013-05-22 11:55:21
Document Index: 265789759

Matched Legal Cases: ['EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKHL ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKHL ', 'UKHL ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ']

Category:2005 cases - Mental Health Law Online (Wikimentalhealth)
Category:2005 cases
Hirst v UK (No 2) 74025/01 (2005) ECHR 681 — The blanket restriction on voting, which applies to all convicted prisoners in prison irrespective of the length of their sentence, the nature or gravity of their offence, or their individual circumstances, is unlawful.
2010-11-032005 cases, Brief summary, Miscellaneous, Transcript
Re LC (2005) ScotSC 19/5/05 — A sheriff may dispense with intimation, or notification, of an application for Guardianship where such intimation "would be likely to pose a serious risk to the health of the adult". It was held that it was insufficient for the medical practitioners to simply repeat the words which appear in the statute and that concise and articulate reasons should be given in order that the court has proper information on which to form a view.
2010-10-302005 cases, No summary, Scottish cases, Transcript
Re FB (Incapacity Application) (2005) ScotSC 26 — An application for guardianship was sought and granted. The court held that the first question it was to consider was whether the respondent was incapable in relation to decisions about, or of acting to safeguard his interests in, his personal welfare, as a consequence of the mental disorder, and whether this was likely to continue to be so. It was held that this meant much more than just being incapable of making decisions but also being incapable of understanding decisions in relation to his interests in his personal welfare or of acting to safeguard or promote those interests. The next question to consider was whether there was any other means provided by or under the Act which would be sufficient to enable the respondent's interests in his personal welfare to be safeguarded. Finally, the court held that the next question to be considered was whether the interests could be safeguarded otherwise than by guardianship order.
2010-10-292005 cases, Brief summary, Scottish cases, Transcript
MK (Mental Illness, Articles 3 and 8) Pakistan (2005) UKIAT 00075 — Consideration of the approach to the availability of treatment and the assessment of Article 3 and 8 cases in an immigration context. [Summary required.]
2010-04-112005 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (Takoushis) v HM Coroner for Inner North London (2005) EWCA Civ 1440 — Where a person dies as a result of what is arguably medical negligence in an NHS hospital, the state must have a system which provides for the practical and effective investigation of the facts and for the determination of civil liability. Unlike in the cases of death in custody, the system does not have to provide for an investigation initiated by the state but may include such an investigation. The present system complied with Article 2. Inquest verdict quashed and new inquest ordered.
R v Reid (2005) EWCA Crim 392 — Appeal against life sentence refused (the appellant would have preferred a restricted hospital order).
2009-04-112005 cases, Life sentence cases, No summary, Transcript
R v Bainton (2005) EWCA Crim 3572 — Two-year sentence quashed and substituted with same sentence suspended for two years: there were exception circumstances as the combination of physical, emotional and sexual abuse had reduced the appellant to a condition where it was difficult to resist the coercion of her husband.
2009-04-112005 cases, Brief summary, Sentence appeal cases, Transcript
Shenkel v The Netherlands 62015/00 (2005) ECHR 935 — (1) Violation of Article 5(1): Failure, in breach of domestic law, to draw up an official record of Court of Appeal hearing which rejected the appeal against continued detention. (2) Violation of Article 5(4): Delay of 17 months before determination of Court of Appeal case. 2009-04-102005 cases, Brief summary, ECHR, Transcript, Tribunal delay
Romanov v Russia 63993/00 (2005) ECHR 933 — (1) Violation of Article 3: The applicant's conditions of detention, in particular the severe overcrowding and its detrimental effect on the applicant's well being, combined with the length of the period during which the applicant was detained in such conditions, amounted to degrading treatment. (2) Violation of Article 5(3): the length of the proceedings (and detention on remand) was attributable neither to the complexity of the case nor to the conduct of the applicant but to the lack of diligence and expedition on the part of court. (3) Violation of Article 6(1) and (3)(c): In view of what was at stake for the applicant the District Court could not, if the trial was to be fair, determine his case without a direct assessment of the applicant's evidence, and the presence of the applicant's lawyer could not compensate for his absence.
2009-04-102005 cases, Brief summary, ECHR, Transcript
Nakach v The Netherlands 5379/02 (2005) ECHR 445 — The practice of the Arnhem Court of Appeal, which had upheld the applicant's continued detention, not to keep official records of hearings (on the basis that no appeal could be made from that court) breached domestic law and therefore breached Article 5(1)
IH v UK 17111/04 (2005) ECHR 934 — The claimant was granted a deferred conditional discharge but subsequently not released as no supervising psychiatrist could be found; the House of Lords found that Article 5(4) had been breached as the Tribunal could not revisit their decision (as the law was then understood). The claimant's Article 5(1)(e) complaint was rejected (on the facts, the alternative to conditional discharge was continued detention rather than absolute discharge), as were his complaints under Article 5(4) (no longer a victim as domestic courts had acknowledged breach and afforded appropriate redress) and Article 5(5) (no longer a victim, no absolute right to compensation).
2009-04-102005 cases, Brief summary, Deferred conditional discharge, Transcript
R (Webb-Johnson) v DPP (2005) EWHC 3123 (Admin) — The District Judge had been wrong to proceed to hear the case in the absence of the claimant (who had mental health problems); the conviction was quashed and a retrial ordered
2009-01-172005 cases, Brief summary, Other criminal law cases, Transcript
R (TP) v West London Youth Court (2005) EWHC 2583 (Admin) — The Youth Court judge was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the claimant would be unable effectively to participate in the proceedings because of his low intellectual ability, so decided not to stay the proceedings for abuse of process; the claimant's judicial review application (on standard of proof, reasons and Article 6 grounds) failed.
Jones v Isleworth Crown Court (2005) EWHC 662 (Admin) — Although the offender had not caused serious harm in the past, and the medical evidence did not recommend a restriction order, the judge was right to impose restrictions on the admission order under Schedule 1 Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991 on the basis that there was a risk of serious harm to the public, because of the history of paranoid schizophrenia with violent command auditory hallucinations and an escalation of violent offending.
2009-01-172005 cases, Brief summary, Restriction order cases, Transcript
IH v UK 17111/04 (2005) — The delay following the deferred conditional discharge decision did not breach Article 5(1), since if no psychiatric supervision could be found then continued detention was the only option, Johnson v UK 22520/93 (1997) ECHR 88 distinguished; the House of Lords had been right in concluding that the Tribunal's inability to reconsider the case in light of the inability to achieve the conditions disclosed a breach of Article 5(4); however, since the domestic court had acknowledged the breach, IH was no longer a "victim" of a violation of Article 5(4); therefore no issues arose under Article 5(5) and, in any event, there is no absolute right to compensation, and the Lords' decision not to award damages was not arbitrary or unreasonable. The application was inadmissible.
2008-11-292005 cases, Brief summary, Deprivation of liberty, ECHR, Transcript
Stec v UK 65731/01 (2005) ECHR 924 — Admissibility decision. State benefits, Article 1 of Protocol No 1 & Article 14.
Re MB (2005) EWCA Civ 1293 — No permission to appeal (Part VII case)
2008-09-132005 cases, No summary, Permission hearings, Transcript
R v IA (2005) EWCA Crim 2077 — Life sentence or s37/41.
2008-09-122005 cases, Life sentence cases, No summary, Transcript
Kolanis v UK 517/02 (2005) ECHR 411 — Conditional discharge/Article 5.
2008-09-122005 cases, After-care, ECHR, No summary, Transcript
R (Taylor) v Dr Haydn-Smith (2005) EWHC 1668 (Admin) — Challenge to compulsory treatment.
2008-02-222005 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, No summary, Transcript
Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police (2005) EWCA Civ 586 — Mental disorder — Practice — Leave to bring proceedings — Claim by patient for damages against police officers — Failure to obtain leave to bring proceedings — Whether proceedings rendered nullity — Whether subsequent grant of leave permissible — Mental Health Act 1983, s139(2). It was a mandatory requirement to seek leave from the High Court under s 139(2) of the Mental Health Act 1983 to bring civil proceedings for actions purported to be done under that Act. Failure to seek leave rendered the proceedings a nullity.
Ward v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (2005) UKHL 32 — Mental disorder — Place of safety order — Validity of detention — Warrant naming health professionals to accompany constable — Named persons absent when warrant executed — Whether warrant and execution valid — Whether power in magistrate to specify names — Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended by Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, s 119(1)(2), Sch 7, Pt I), s 135(1). A condition imposed by a magistrate issuing a warrant under s135 of the Mental Health Act 1983 specifying named persons to accompany the constable executing the warrant had been invalid.
R (E) v Bristol City Council (2005) EWHC 74 (Admin) — Section 11 and practicability of informing NR.
2007-02-072005 cases, Consulting NR, No summary, Transcript
R (SSHD) v MHRT, re CH (2005) EWHC 746 (Admin) — No discernible reasons given for preferring patient's evidence to RMO's; material reason given in subsequent witness statement which had not originally been recorded.
2007-02-062005 cases, Brief summary, Reasons, Transcript
R (AN) v MHRT (2005) EWCA Civ 1605 — MHRT should apply the standard of proof on the balance of probabilities to all the issues it has to determine.
2007-02-062005 cases, Brief summary, Burden and standard of proof, Transcript
R (East London and the City MH NHS Trust) v MHRT, re IH (2005) EWHC 2329 (Admin) — The Tribunal failed properly to deal with s72(2)(a) when directing discretionary discharge; should have adjourned for information to satisfy itself that appropriate aftercare would be in place; and failed to consider their s72(2) power to recommend transfer.
R (SSHD) v MHRT, re BR (2005) EWCA Civ 1616 — MHRT granted absolute discharge without considering conditional discharge criteria; High Court quashed decision, so patient became detained restricted patient again; Home Office refused to grant s17 leave until next MHRT; Court of Appeal partially quashed MHRT decision but declared patient entitled to be conditionally discharged pending MHRT determination of appropriate discharge type.
R (SC) v MHRT (2005) EWHC 17 (Admin) — (1) In deciding not to discharge, Tribunal can consider disorders other than the those from which the patient is classified as suffering. (2) Section 75 is compatible with ECHR even though it includes no express criteria for consideration.
2006-04-132005 cases, Brief summary, Other classification cases, Reasons, Transcript
2006-04-132005 cases, Detailed summary, Other classification cases, Transcript
R (B) v Dr SS (2005) EWHC 86 (Admin) — This was the first of two JRs involving the same parties. Challenge to compulsory treatment.
2006-04-132005 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, No summary, Transcript
Lewis v Gibson (2005) EWCA Civ 587 — Appeal of interim s29 displacement order. Appeal dismissed.
2006-04-132005 cases, Displacement, No summary, Transcript
R (B) v Dr Haddock (2005) EWHC 921 (Admin) — Challenge to compulsory administration of medication. Claim dismissed.
R (B) v Camden London Borough Council (2005) EWHC 1366 (Admin) — Claimant sought damages breach of statutory duty under s117 causing delay after deferred conditional discharge. Claim dismissed. 2006-04-132005 cases, After-care, Brief summary, Transcript
R (K) v West London MH NHS Trust (2005) EWHC 1454 (Admin) — Leave/funding.
2006-04-132005 cases, Ministry of Justice, No summary, Transcript
R (B) v Dr SS (2005) EWHC 1936 (Admin) — This was the second of two JRs involving the same parties. Challenge to compulsory treatment.
R (Munjaz) v Ashworth Hospital Authority (2005) UKHL 58 — The Code of Practice is guidance rather than instruction, but must not be departed from in the absence of cogent reasons; the Ashworth seclusion policy, although deviating from the standards in the Code of Practice, was lawful.
2006-04-122005 cases, Brief summary, Miscellaneous, Transcript
R (SSHD) v MHRT, re BR (2005) EWHC 2468 (Admin) — For restricted patients, Tribunals should consider appropriateness of liability to recall even if not satisfied that there is any detainable mental disorder.
2006-04-122005 cases, Absolute or conditional discharge, Brief summary, Transcript
R (B) v Ashworth Hospital Authority (2005) UKHL 20 — A patient detained for treatment under the Mental Health Act 1983 could be treated compulsorily under s 63 of that Act for any disorder from which he suffered, and not only for the particular form of disorder from which he was classified as suffering under the application or order which authorised his detention.
2006-04-122005 cases, Detailed summary, Other classification cases, Transcript
R (DJ) v MHRT; R (AN) v MHRT (2005) EWHC 587 (Admin) — The correct standard of proof, where one applies, for the MHRT to apply is the civil standard.
2006-04-102005 cases, Brief summary, Burden and standard of proof, Transcript
E v Channel Four (2005) EWHC 1144 (Fam)G
Gorshkov v Ukraine 67531/01 (2005) ECHR 936H
Hirst v UK (No 2) 74025/01 (2005) ECHR 681I
IH v UK 17111/04 (2005) ECHR 934J
Jones v Isleworth Crown Court (2005) EWHC 662 (Admin)K
Kolanis v UK 517/02 (2005) ECHR 411L
Lewis v Gibson (2005) EWCA Civ 587M
M v B (2005) EWHC 1681 (Fam)
MK (Mental Illness, Articles 3 and 8) Pakistan (2005) UKIAT 00075N
Nakach v The Netherlands 5379/02 (2005) ECHR 445
R (B) v Camden London Borough Council (2005) EWHC 1366 (Admin)
R (E) v Bristol City Council (2005) EWHC 74 (Admin)
Re MB (2005) EWCA Civ 1293
Romanov v Russia 63993/00 (2005) ECHR 933S
Storck v Germany 61603/00 (2005) ECHR 406W
Retrieved from "http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/index.php?title=Category:2005_cases&oldid=8641"
Printable version	Permanent link	- This page was last modified at 00:14 on 6 October 2008. Page credits: Jonathan Privacy policy