June 2024 chronology
This page is automatically generated: it will only be complete at the end of the month. All monthly updates are available here: Archive of monthly updates.
See June 2024 update for a thematic summary of these changes.
- 15/06/24(1932): Change to set aside rule. Tribunal Procedure Committee, 'Consultation on possible amendments to the power to set-aside a decision' (consultation from 15/5/24 to 7/8/24) —Consultation on potential change to rule 45 HESC Rules (and other similar rules) to allow tribunals to set aside procedurally irregular decisions on their own initiative.
- 15/06/24(1925): Legislation. Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 — Section 21 (when in force) will allow victim impact statements to be submitted to the Mental Health Tribunal, and allow victims to read the statement to the tribunal unless it considers that there are good reasons against. The tribunal may have regard to the statement in relation to conditional discharge and conditions.
- 15/06/24(1921): Costs guidance. Legal Aid Agency, 'Costs Assessment Guidance: for use with the 2018 Standard Civil Contracts' (v10, December 2023) —The (minor) changes made in each version are listed on the second page of this document.
- 15/06/24(1908): Case (Donationes mortis causa). Rahman v Hassan [2024] EWHC 1290 (Ch) — This case, primarily about transactions between the claimant and the deceased, mentions capacity under the common law and MCA 2005.
- 15/06/24(1903): Case (Death). University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust v Mother of G [2024] EWHC 1288 (Fam) — Application brought by the Hospital Trust for a declaration pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction that an adult woman had died, and for authorisation to cease provision of all current medical support.
- 13/06/24(1445): Two PELT courses postponed. New dates for these courses are as follows: PELT: Court of Protection and MCA Masterclass (online, now 28/6/24) and PELT: Masterclass for MHA Administrators (online, now 2/7/24).
- 13/06/24(1429): Consolidated version of UT Rules. A consolidated version in PDF format has been published on the Gov.uk website. At first glance it looks more accurate than Legislation.gov.uk (e.g. see rule 5A). See external links section of Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008.
- 13/06/24(1348): Case (DOL in police cell). Surrey Police v PC [2024] EWHC 1274 (Fam) — (1) The High Court authorised deprivation of liberty under its inherent jurisdiction in a police cell while a hospital bed was being found. (2) The judge endorsed guidance advocated by the Official Solicitor for future cases that involve an application to the court to authorise the deprivation of an individual's liberty in the police station either under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court or section 4A of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. (3) The local authority was ordered to pay the OS's costs.
- 10/06/24(1246): Event. Event:MHLA: Panel course (online, 8-9 July 2024) —The Mental Health Lawyers Association is an approved provider of the two-day course which must be attended by prospective members of the Law Society’s accreditation scheme (formerly called the 'panel'). Cost: £300 (member), £390 (non-member), £270 (group discount). See MHLA website for further details and booking information.
- 10/06/24(1159): Tracked changes version of new Law Society MHT practice note. You probably did not read the February 2024 version because the changes from the August 2022 version were not identified. Now a tracked changes version has been created by Mental Health Law Online. See Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (24/2/24).
- 09/06/24(1712): Mental capacity law newsletter. 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Report' (issue 141, June 2024) —"Highlights this month include: (1) In the Health, Welfare and Deprivation of Liberty Report: when no option is a good one, snapshots from the frontline, and are we listening closely enough to the person in the context of deprivation of liberty; (2) In the Property and Affairs Report: the Powers of Attorney Act 2023 on election hold, contesting costs in probate cases and guidance on viewing LPAs online; (3) In the Practice and Procedure Report: post-death costs, what does it mean to be an expert in the person, and procedure in brain stem death cases; (4) In the Mental Health Matters Report: the MHA 1983 under strain in police cells and the hospital setting; (5) In the Wider Context Report: the inherent jurisdiction – a case, guidance, and a challenge from Ireland; the older child and medical treatment decisions – mental capacity or competence, and Capacity and contempt proceedings – what is the test? (6) In the Scotland Report: guardianship under examination before the Sheriff Appeal Court and Scottish Government’s Mental Health and Capacity Reform Programme.
- 09/06/24(1402): Job advert. Campbell-Taylor Solicitors, London - MH panel member and MH paralegal (deadline 28/6/24). See Jobs
- 03/06/24(1102): Case (Absolute discharge of imprisoned conditionally discharged patient). Re G (absolute discharge) [2023] MHLO 4 (FTT) — In this decision the First-tier Tribunal sets out its reasons for absolutely discharging a conditionally discharged patient who at the time was an imprisoned lifer many years pre-tariff. Permission to publish this decision was subsequently granted by the FTT.
- 02/06/24(1325): Case (Open justice in the First-tier Tribunal). Re A (publication of MHT decision) [2023] MHLO 3 (FTT) — Permission to publish the First-tier Tribunal decision (which was an interlocutory decision setting aside the initial refusal of the patient's request for an all-female panel) was granted. The Deputy Chamber President took into account that "departing from the open justice principle can only be justified in exceptional circumstances when [it is] strictly necessary to secure the proper administration of justice" and that "in circumstances where the patient wants the decision to be published on the website and thereby waives her privacy, the balance falls in favour of publication". She noted that there were no exceptional circumstances for departing from the open justice principle, that she had taken into account the contents and nature of the decision and the level of redaction and anonymity, and that all cases will be considered on their own merits. The patient's argument that permission to publish was not necessary was rejected.
The following category (in the blue box) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: