RM v St Andrew's Healthcare [2010] UKUT 119 (AAC)

Non-disclosure of covert medication (1) When considering the "interests of justice" limb of rule 14(2), the key test to be applied is whether or not non-disclosure of the document or information would allow the patient to make an effective challenge to his detention. (2) On the facts, without knowing that he was being covertly medicated the patient would be unable effectively to challenge his detention; the non-disclosure decision was set aside and re-made. (3) Non-disclosure orders should not only be drafted in terms of documents, but also should deal, in a precise, clear and exhaustive way, with the information which should not be disclosed.

External links

• Transcript on Tribunals website

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII

Subject(s):

• Reasons🔍
• Upper Tribunal decisions🔍

Date: 23/4/10🔍

Court: Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)🔍

Cited by:

• M v Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board [2018] UKUT 120 (AAC)

Judge(s):

• Jacobs🔍

Parties:

• RM🔍
• St Andrew's Healthcare🔍

Citation number(s):

• [2010] UKUT 119 (AAC)^B
• (2010) 116 BMLR 72

What links here:

• M v Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board [2018] UKUT 120 (AAC)
• Jonathan Wilson, 'Mental health: update' (Legal Action, February 2019)
• Non-disclosure of documents and information (MHT)
• Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (24/2/24)

Published: 6/5/10 18:39

Cached: 2024-12-22 08:03:48