Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (27/5/16)

Law Society MHT practice note This practice note advises on providing legal advice to clients appearing before the First Tier Tribunal (Mental Health) in England and the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales. It has information under the following headings: (1) Introduction; (2) The right to legal advice and representation before the tribunal; (3) Communication with the client; (4) Taking instructions; (5) Your duties towards your client; (6) Good tribunal practice; (7) Representing children and young people before the tribunal; (8) More information. It was last updated on 27/5/16 to cover recent case law including YA (see para 4.1), Care and Treatment Reviews (see para 6.2.1) and includes other more minor amendments. Superseded by: Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (12/12/19).

External links

This version:

Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (27/5/16)

Older versions:

Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (22/1/15) . This update was to clarify aspects of the advice contained in the previous version, as well as to reflect changes in procedural and other rules, case law, and the SRA Code of Conduct.

Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (30/9/11) . During 2013 the Law Society published a 30/9/11 version of their 'Representation before mental health tribunals' practice note. The revisions since the 19/5/11 version relate to the 2011 Code of Conduct which replaced the 2007 Code, including: (a) five new introductory paragraphs at 1.2, and 'will be updated' replaced by 'has been updated'; (b) second paragraph of 3.2, in relation to client care letters, replaced by three new paragraphs; (c) abbreviations added at 8.5. Other references to the 2007 Code are unchanged. The 13/8/09 version was criticised in AA v Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2009] UKUT 195 (AAC) - the current version criticises that case.