R v MHRT, ex p Hall [1999] EWHC Admin 351
MHLR
The summary below has been supplied by Kris Gledhill, Editor of the Mental Health Law Reports. The full report can be purchased from Southside Online Publishing (if there is a "file not found" error, it means this particular report is not yet available online). More similar case summaries from the year 1999 are available here: MHLR 1999.
Identifying the aftercare authority obliged to put arrangements in place - R v (1) The Mental Health Review Tribunal (2) Torfaen County Borough Council (3) Gwent Health Authority ex p Russell Hall [1999] MHLR 49
Points Arising: The provisions of s117 Mental Health Act 1983 are designed to ensure that there is always an aftercare authority, being the place where the patient resided before detention or, if there was no such residence, the place where the patient was to be sent on release; the duty as to aftercare included the provision of information to a Tribunal and so arose before discharge.
Facts and Outcome: H was a restricted patient, having been found not guilty of manslaughter by reason of insanity in 1991; at the time, he lived in Torfaen. A conditional discharge was granted by a Tribunal in February 1997, the conditions including residence (which was to be away from the place of the index offence) and supervision in Gwent. A dispute as to who was responsible for the aftercare meant that the conditions had not been met by the time of the next Tribunal, which imposed a conditional discharge with more stringent conditions (indicating that he should reside further away from the location of the index offence, and setting requirements that the supervising psychiatrist and social worker have forensic expertise). In judicial review proceedings it was held that s117 MHA 1983 required Torfaen, as the place where H had been resident before detention, to make the arrangements required on discharge, including by obtaining services from another authority, and prevent any impasse by ensuring the referral of the case back to the Tribunal; it was also noted that the aftercare duty included the provision of information to the Tribunal and so arose before discharge. Gwent also failed to provide adequate information in advance of the hearing or to take adequate steps by way of implementation. (A finding that the Tribunal had erred by imposing conditions that would not be implemented was overturned on appeal.)
External links
Full judgment: Possible Bailii link (not there when checked last night, but might have appeared since)
Subject(s):
Date: 23/4/99🔍
Court: High Court (Administrative Court)🔍
Judicial history:
Judge(s):
- Scott Baker🔍
Parties:
Citation number(s):
- [1999] EWHC Admin 351Not on Bailii!
Published: 12/9/08 16:09
Cached: 2024-12-19 10:35:46