Holly.gif
Open justice | Let us know if you have a tribunal decision you would like to publish (see Re A)
Email updates | CPD scheme

Online forum | Latest topic on forum: NR rights after patient released to care | News

Category

Category:Challenges to compulsory treatment


The old category structure used on this page is comprehensive as it contains every relevant case. The new database structure was introduced in 2019. It is more potentially useful than the old categorisation system: it includes all cases since January 2017, but only a minority of older cases: see Special:Drilldown/Cases. The pages below are initially ordered according to the dates on which they were added to the site (most recent first). The order can be changed by clicking on the symbol beside a column heading: click on the symbol beside "Page and summary" for alphabetical order; click beside "Categories" for the order in which the cases were reported. Click on the arrow symbol again to reverse the order. Click on a page name to view the relevant page. Asterisks mark those cases which have been added to the new database structure.

Case and summary Date added Categories
* Treatment under s63 North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust v KAG [2024] EWCOP 38 (T3) — The Trusts sought s15 MCA 2005 declarations that: (1) it is in the best interests of KAG to undergo urgent placement of a percutaneous gastrostomy tube ('PEG'); (2) the proposed PEG procedure could lawfully be undertaken pursuant to powers under s63 MHA 1983; (3) KAG is ineligible to be deprived of her liberty under Sched 1A MCA. 2024‑10‑21 11:35:10 Pages using DynamicPageList3 parser function, Judgment available on Bailii, Cases, 2024 cases, Medical treatment cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment


B v Croydon Health Authority [1995] Fam 133 — (1) Medical treatment for mental disorder under s63 includes treatment of the symptoms of the disorder (as well as the disorder itself) and includes a range of acts ancillary to the core treatment; (2) on the facts, nasogastric feeding was treatment ancillary to treatment for psychopathic disorder. 2011‑05‑29 15:05:04 1995 cases, Brief summary, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on MHLO, Judgment missing from Bailii, Transcript


R (N) v Dr M [2002] EWHC 1911 (Admin) — Unsuccessful challenge to compulsory treatment. 2009‑10‑31 18:40:09 2002 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (K) v Dr Hughes [2003] EWHC 357 (Admin) — Challenge to administration of ECT. 2009‑06‑14 20:16:22 2003 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (Brady) v Dr Collins [2000] EWHC 639 (Admin) — (1) The hunger strike was a manifestation or symptom of the patient's personality disorder, and the commencement of force-feeding was justified under s63 as medical treatment for mental disorder; even if s63 did not apply, the patient lacked capacity and the doctors had acted in what they lawfully believed was his best interests; (2) The appropriate test when considering challenges to compulsory treatment under s63 was the "super-Wednesbury" test [caution: the law has since changed] 2009‑04‑11 22:04:34 2000 cases, Brief summary, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, Transcript


Wilkinson v UK 14659/02 [2006] ECHR 1171 — The applicant's complaints were all declared inadmissible. He had complained that: (1) medical treatment against his will was a breach of the negative obligations under Articles 3 and 8; (2) the authorities failed in their positive obligation under Articles 3 and 8 to provide suitable safeguards against the imposition of treatment that would violate his rights, in particular that the authorities should have sought approval from a court before imposing treatment and that he should have been able to bring a challenge against the treatment, before it took place, in a court which would have been able to provide a suitable level of review; (3) the inability to have a determination of his ‘civil right’ to autonomy in a court that would have provided a review on the merits was a violation of Article 6; (4) the lack of effective remedy was a breach of Article 13; (5) discrimination on the basis of his status as a detained patient was a breach of Article 14. 2009‑04‑10 22:17:59 2006 cases, Brief summary, Challenges to compulsory treatment, ECHR, Judgment available on Bailii, Transcript


Naumenko v Ukraine 42023/98 [2004] ECHR 68 — Enforced medical treatment of prisoner did not violate Article 3. 2009‑04‑10 15:12:37 2004 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Detailed summary, ECHR, Judgment available on Bailii, Transcript


R (Wilkinson) v Broadmoor Hospital [2001] EWCA Civ 1545 — The decision to impose treatment without consent upon a protesting patient is a potential invasion of his rights under Article 3 or Article 8, and he is entitled to a proper hearing, on the merits, of whether the statutory grounds for imposing this treatment upon him against his will are made out. (...) 2008‑10‑15 19:33:28 2001 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Detailed summary, Judgment available on Bailii, Transcript


R (S) v Collins [1998] EWCA Civ 1349 — Challenge to compulsory treatment. 2008‑09‑13 06:21:31 1998 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (S) v Collins [1998] EWHC Admin 490 — Challenge to compulsory treatment. 2008‑09‑13 06:20:49 1998 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available offline, Judgment missing from Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (S) v Collins [1997] EWCA Civ 2019 — Challenge to compulsory treatment. 2008‑09‑13 06:18:33 1997 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on MHLO, Judgment missing from Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (JB) v Dr Haddock [2006] EWCA Civ 961 — Challenge to compulsory treatment. 2008‑02‑22 15:32:07 2006 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (Taylor) v Dr Haydn-Smith [2005] EWHC 1668 (Admin) — Challenge to compulsory treatment. 2008‑02‑22 15:30:03 2005 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (N) v Dr M [2002] EWCA Civ 1789 — Challenge to compulsory treatment. 2008‑02‑22 15:29:10 2002 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Detailed summary, Judgment available on Bailii, Transcript


R (Wooder) v Dr Feggetter [2002] EWCA Civ 554 — SOAD should give reasons. 2006‑04‑16 11:41:35 2002 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Detailed summary, Judgment available on Bailii, Transcript


R (PS) v Dr G [2003] EWHC 2335 (Admin) — Challenge to compulsory treatment. 2006‑04‑16 11:06:30 2003 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, 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. 2006‑04‑13 21:55:38 2005 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (B) v Dr Haddock [2005] EWHC 921 (Admin) — Challenge to compulsory administration of medication. Claim dismissed. 2006‑04‑13 21:39:18 2005 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Judgment available on Bailii, No summary, Transcript


R (B) v Dr SS [2006] EWCA Civ 28 — MENTAL HEALTH — Compulsory detention — Consent to treatment — Convicted rapist detained in secure mental hospital — Refusal to consent to treatment — Whether compulsory treatment in breach of human rights — Mental Health Act 1983 (c 20), s 58 — Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, Pt I, arts 3, 8, 14. The compulsory treatment of a mental patient under s58(3)(b) of the Mental Health Act 1983 did not infringe the patient’s human rights under arts 3, 8 and 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Provided such treatment was medically necessary, it was not necessary also to show that it was required to prevent the patient causing harm to himself or others. 2006‑04‑12 21:17:38 2006 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Detailed summary, Judgment available on Bailii, 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. 2006‑04‑12 21:16:00 2005 cases, Challenges to compulsory treatment, Detailed summary, Judgment available on Bailii, Transcript


Retrieved from "https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/index.php?title=Category:Challenges_to_compulsory_treatment&oldid=36205"