View source for March 2014 update

==Case law==
===Cheshire West===
*'''Deprivation of liberty.''' {{pagesummary|Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19}}

:*'''Lucy Series, 'The Acid Test' (The Small Places, 20/3/14).''' See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''Alex Ruck Keene, 'Cheshire West - one day on' (Mental Capacity Law and Policy, 20/3/14).''' See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''Mithran Samuel, 'Supreme Court ruling heralds sharp rise in Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards cases' (Community Care, 19/3/14).''' See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''O'Donnell's Solicitors, 'Cheshire West: The Supreme Court decides' (information sheet March 2014 no 2, 19/3/14).''' See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''Simon Burrows, 'What is deprivation of liberty? The Supreme Court speaks' (19/3/14)''' See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''Doughty Street Chambers, 'A gilded cage is still a cage' (19/3/14).''' See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''Alex Ruck Keene, 'Cheshire West: the Supreme Court’s right hook' (Mental Capacity Law and Policy, 19/3/14).''' See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''Youtube, 'UK Supreme Court Judgment 19th March 2014' (19/3/14).''' Video of Lady Hale explaining Supreme Court decision. See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2014) UKSC 19]]

:*'''Cheshire West.''' The Supreme Court judgment should be available at or shortly after 0945 today on the [http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2014/ Bailii '2014 United Kingdom Supreme Court ' page] and the [http://supremecourt.uk/news/latest-judgments.html Supreme Court 'Latest judgments' page]. See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1257]]

:*'''Cheshire West decision.''' The Supreme Court's 'future judgments' page contains the following information. Hand-down on Wednesday 19/3/14 at 0945 in Courtroom 1. Proposed bench for hand-down: Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Toulson. The hand-down will be streamed on [http://news.sky.com/home/supreme-court Supreme Court Live] and will then be made available on the Supreme Court's [http://www.youtube.com/uksupremecourt YouTube channel]. See [[Cheshire West and Chester Council v P (2011) EWCA Civ 1257]]

===Community care===
*'''Community care case.''' {{pagesummary|R (Cornwall Council) v SSH (2014) EWCA Civ 12}}

===Mental Health Tribunal===
*'''Transcript added and summary updated.''' {{pagesummary|Re Ian Brady (2013) MHLO 89 (FTT)}}

===Solicitor's Regulation Authority===
*16/03/14 (1): '''SRA decision.''' {{pagesummary|Lucia Benyu of Peters Legal Limited (SRA decision: prosecution) (2014) MHLO 15 (SRA)}}

===Lasting Power of Attorney and Deputyship===
*'''LPA case.''' Neutral citation added (case was already on MHLO). {{pagesummary|Re Buckley: The Public Guardian v C (2013) EWHC 2965 (COP), (2013) MHLO 13}}

*'''LPA case.''' {{pagesummary|Re DP (Revocation of LPA): OPG v John Marney (2014) EWHC B4 (COP), (2014) MHLO 8}}

*'''Deputyship case.''' {{pagesummary|JS v KB and MP (Property And Affairs Deputy for DB) (2014) EWHC 483 (COP), (2014) MHLO 12}}

*'''Deputyship case.''' {{pagesummary|Re ES: Kent County Council v PLC and AJS (2014) EWHC B6 (COP), (2014) MHLO 10}}

===Medical===
*'''Medical case.''' {{pagesummary|Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals Foundation Trust v LM (2014) EWHC 454 (COP), (2014) MHLO 14}}

*'''Medical case.''' {{pagesummary|Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust v JB (2014) EWHC 342 (COP), (2014) MHLO 9}}

===Other capacity cases===
*'''Deprivation of liberty case.''' {{pagesummary|The Local Authority v Mrs D (2013) EWHC B34 (COP), (2013) MHLO 140}}

*'''Capacity case.''' {{pagesummary|LB Redbridge v G (2014) EWHC 485 (COP), (2014) MHLO 13}}

*'''Best interests case.''' {{pagesummary|Westminster City Council v Sykes (2014) EWHC B9 (COP), (2014) MHLO 11}}

*'''Capacity case.''' {{pagesummary|RC v CC (2014) EWHC 131 (COP), (2014) MHLO 7}}

*'''Capacity case.''' {{pagesummary|Re X, Y and Z (Minors) (2014) EWCOP 87}}

*'''Committal case.''' {{pagesummary|Re PW (Court of Protection Order) (2014) EWHC B8 (COP), (2014) MHLO 4}}

*'''Neutral citation number changed.''' The transcript of [[YLA v PM (2013) EWHC 4020 (COP), (2013) MHLO 114]] was initially made available with the neutral citation number [2013] EWHC 3622 (Fam), but the case has since been published on Bailii as [2013] EWHC 4020 (COP).

==Practice Directions and Guidance==
===Mental Health Tribunal===
*'''Practice Direction.''' {{pagesummary|Practice Direction and Guidance: Medical Examinations (11/3/14)}}

*'''Legislation.''' {{pagesummary|Tribunal Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2014}}

*'''Consultation response (medical members).''' Tribunal Procedure Committee, 'Response to consultation on proposed amendments to the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008' (March 2014). See [[Consultations#Mental Health Tribunal]]

===Court of Protection===
*'''COP practice guidance.''' {{pagesummary|Practice Guidance (Transparency in the Court Of Protection) (2014) EWHC B2 (COP), (2014) MHLO 5}}

==Reports==
===Care Quality Commission===
*'''CQC, 'Monitoring the use of the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in 2012/13' (January 2014).''' The following are the chapter headings and key points from each chapter. (1) '''Patterns of use of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.''' (a) Use of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards overall did not increase greatly during 2012/13, but there were still unexplained regional differences in their use. (b) There has been a significant increase in applications for the use of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards to protect the rights of older people deprived of their liberty in their best interests. In contrast, there has been a slight fall in the applications relating to people aged 18 to 64. (2) '''Monitoring the use of the DOLS through inspection of care homes and hospitals.''' (a) To carry out our fundamental responsibility to protect and promote the rights of people who use health and social care, it is essential that we monitor how well care homes and hospitals understand when and how to use the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. (b) As in previous years, a majority of care homes and hospitals fail to comply with their statutory requirement to notify us of applications to use the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, and their outcomes. This makes it harder for our inspectors to identify people subject to application or authorisation for inclusion in pathway tracking. (c) We expect hospitals and care homes to notify all outcomes of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications to CQC. (d) We remind all care homes and hospitals of the requirement to work with people who may lack capacity to consent within the framework of the MCA, and in particular to make every effort to minimise restraint and restrictions on liberty. (e) We are working to improve the knowledge and confidence of our staff with regard to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and the wider MCA. (3) '''Monitoring of supervisory bodies.''' (a) We are pleased to have strengthened our collaborative relationship with supervisory bodies, and hope to build on this to improve our shared understanding of the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. (b) There appears a wide range of practice with regard to extending urgent authorisations. We encourage local authorities to ensure that this practice is kept to a minimum. (c) Very few of the reviews that happen are undertaken at the request of people subject to an authorisation or their representatives. We encourage local authorities and IMCAs to support these people to request reviews where appropriate. (4) '''Better understanding of the experience of people who have been the subject of authorisation applications.''' (a) We are very grateful to the IMCAs who helped us this year by completing our survey on the experiences of people personally affected by the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. We plan to build on this next year, by interviewing people identified by local authorities or IMCAs as agreeing to talk to us. (b) The IMCA survey provided some important and useful insights into the experience of people who may be subject to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and their representatives. It paints a mixed picture of people’s experience, with some evidence of good practice but also evidence of people still not always being listened to or involved in important decisions about their lives or the lives of a relative or close friend. (c) There appears to be variation in practice among IMCAs in how actively they encourage people subject to authorisation and their representatives to ask for reviews or to challenge the authorisation to the Court of Protection. We encourage IMCAs to share knowledge of how and when to do this, and IMCA organisations to support their staff to gain the knowledge and confidence to help people affected by the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards to challenge the status quo. See [[CQC]]

:*'''CQC, 'Monitoring the Mental Health Act in 2012/13 - Summary' (January 2014).''' See [[CQC]]

*'''CQC, 'Monitoring the Mental Health Act in 2012/13' (January 2014).''' The following are the report's key findings for each chapter, and its concluding recommendations: (1) '''The use of the Mental Health Act in 2012/13.''' (a) The number of detentions continued to rise, with the highest number of uses of the Act ever recorded. The national statistics on use of the Act showed a rise in detentions, whether these are at the point of admission to hospital or subsequent to informal admission. (b) In 2012/13, 27% of recorded outcomes of section 2 detentions showed that the patient continued to be detained. This is a small but significant rising trend from the 24% in the previous year. (c) Since the introduction of community treatment orders (CTOs) in 2008, the power had been used 18,942 times by 31 March 2013. (d) Data available for 2012/13, as in previous years, showed a continuing trend in high rates of detention among certain black and minority ethnic groups. (e) Data on self-harm, restraint, assaults and seclusion, which were previously collected for inpatients in the Count Me In census, are now being collected through the Mental Health Minimum Data Set. CQC is looking at how we can use this data to monitor the experience of inpatients, including any associations with ethnicity. (2) '''A service responsive to people’s needs.''' (a) Some progress has been made in this area, although there is still a long way to go, with evidence that care plans and risk assessments had not considered the principle of least restriction in 10% of wards visited. (b) 27% of care plans we reviewed in six months of 2012/13 showed no evidence of patients being involved in their creation. And at least 22% of care plans showed no evidence of patients’ views being taken into account. This is no improvement on our finding in 2011/12. (c) Inadequate discharge planning can lead to prolonged periods of detention and we are very concerned there was a lack of evidence of discharge planning in 29% of the care plans we viewed. The Code of Practice is clear in its expectations for providers to consider aftercare with all detained patients and we expect this to be evident for all patients subject to the MHA. (d) We are pleased to report almost all wards had access to Independent Mental Health Advocacy (IMHA) services. This is a considerable improvement in basic access to IMHAs with 92% of wards reporting direct access for patients to IMHA. (e) However, there was no improvement in evidence of patients’ rights being explained to them. In the last two years we have not seen adequate evidence of discussions with patients about their rights in at least one in 10 wards. (3) '''Ways in which people are subject to restrictions.''' (a) We continued to see widespread use of blanket rules. Some type of blanket rule was in place in more than three quarters of the wards we visited. Such practices have no basis in law or national guidance on good practice and are unacceptable. (b) In 46% of cases reviewed the reason given for the blanket rules was ‘hospital policy’. We were also told it was because of a historical incident, or in 13% of cases no-one seemed able to give a reason. (c) The most common restrictions related to using the internet and mobile phones, smoking, and access to secure outdoor space and communal rooms. In many cases these rules applied across the ward to both detained and informal patients. (d) Overall, about a third of ward managers told us the police had been called to their ward at least once in the previous 12 months to help contain patient behaviour. (e) We continue to hear accounts of patients’ experiences of being restrained. We promote examples of good practice where providers of inpatient mental health services have taken positive steps to reduce the use of restraint. (4) '''Consent to treatment.''' (a) We continue to observe that in a significant proportion of records there are no recorded assessments of patients’ consent or capacity at the point of admission or at the three month stage in detention. (b) We noted improving good practice in helping patients to draw up advance statements of their preferences for care and treatment. (c) In 2012/13, we arranged 13,520 visits by Second Opinion Appointed Doctors (SOADs). This is the heaviest demand for second opinions to date. This was despite an amendment to regulations that, from June 2012, removed the legal requirement for second opinion certification in the case of consenting CTO patients. (d) Where the treatment plan proposes medicine above BNF limits our SOADs are twice as likely to make significant (8%) or slight changes (32%) to the prescribed treatment as when it falls within BNF limits. This gives an indication of the safeguard provided by our SOADs against unwarranted treatment. (5) '''Access to care during a mental health crisis and the Mental Health Act.''' (a) In some areas difficulty in accessing Approved Mental Health Professionals (AMHPs), with waits of over four hours out of hours, are being reported. (b) In 2012/13, there were 21,814 uses of section 136, with over 7,500 estimated to involve the use of a police cell. This is a decrease of 7% on the previous reporting period. (c) Only 17% of recorded uses of hospital- based places of safety under section 136 resulted in further detention, following assessment by mental health professionals. (d) In one area police told us that 41 young people had been detained in police cells over the previous year, the youngest of whom was 11. This is unacceptable. (e) Health-based places of safety are often not staffed at all times. This has led to hospital places of safety lying empty while a patient is taken to police custody. (f) When we met with carers through our MHA monitoring they told us they were not always provided with enough information to understand the role and function of services or how to get help in a crisis. (6) '''Deaths of patients subject to the Mental Health Act.''' (a) In 2011/12 and 2012/13 we were notified of 595 deaths in total. There were 511 deaths of detained patients, and 84 deaths of patients subject to CTOs. (b) We support the recommendation of the Ministerial Board on Deaths in Custody that, NHS England - with input from CQC and the Coroners Society - should produce clear and consistent guidance on how all mental health providers should undertake investigations following the death of a detained patient. (c) We will be working with others to review national data and how this can be combined and shared to improve scrutiny and embed learning. We believe this will improve national understanding and our ability to work together to protect patients’ rights and increase safety. (d) We have introduced a patient safety outliers programme in mental health and will be using the data from this and our collaborative work with other national organisations to inform our understanding of providers and our assessment of how safe their services are. (e) The total number of reported deaths by unnatural causes for detained patients deaths reported to CQC rose from 36 to 48 in 2012/13 compared to the previous year. (7) '''Conclusions and next steps.''' We expect to see change in the following areas: (a) Hospitals must ensure that their policies promote the principle of least restriction and that their staff are supported to promote the dignity and autonomy of people in their care. (b) Hospitals must promote cultures that support therapeutic practices and reduce to a minimum the use of restraint and seclusion. The principles of the Code of Practice and the emerging national evidence on restraint need to be considered by all services. We expect detaining authorities to audit and review their local practices to minimise the use of restraint and seclusion. We expect to see evidence of coordinated care planning that allows patients’ preferences to be taken into account. This is to promote individual choice and involvement in avoiding or managing episodes that may otherwise result in restraint or seclusion. (c) NHS and local authority service commissioners of mental health services must act on these findings and on guidance in the Implementation Framework to the national mental health outcomes strategy to improve access to services and outcomes for people with mental health problems. We expect Clinical Commissioning Groups to ensure that local special urgency arrangements (section 140) are clear and provided to local authorities. (d) Commissioners and providers of mental health services must be proactive in initiating and embedding learning from the deaths of people subject to the MHA. We expect to see alignment of local preventative and investigative work with the national findings on mental health related deaths. This includes emerging guidance from national bodies and the use of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness toolkit. We expect services to notify us of deaths of detained patients and patients who are on a community treatment order at the time of their death. See [[CQC]]

===House of Lords===
*'''House of Lords report on MCA.''' House of Lords Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005, 'Mental Capacity Act 2005: post-legislative scrutiny' (HL Paper 139, 13/3/14). This is the final report. The following is the 'easy-read' version of the 39 recommendations (without the pictures or headings) for those who want to have an initial skim-read. (1) Everyone needs to be told more about the MCA, including staff, people who use services, carers and families. (See point 12 as well.) (2) The Government needs to check how much the MCA is used in health and social care and other areas, from banks to the police. (3) There are lots of organisations that should make sure the MCA happens. But it’s not working. We want a single organisation to be in charge of making sure the MCA happens. It should be separate from government. They should write a report each year on what they are doing. It should include people who might be seen as unable to make decisions as well as their families and carers. (4) A government group, called the MCA Steering Group, should be asked to look at how the organisation should do its work and who should be in the organisation. (5) CQC should check health and social care services are using the MCA in the right way and people are getting their rights. (6)-(11) Professionals must get more training about using the MCA. The people who buy services must be made to use the MCA. All the organisations in charge of professionals should be told to help make the MCA happen. (12) Different people need different information about the MCA. All the people who need to know about the MCA, from people who use services to lawyers, must have the information they need about the MCA. In the ways they need it. This information needs to be good and kept up to date by the organisation in charge of making the MCA happen. (13)-(21) The next part (13 to 21) is all about the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (or DoLS). These are rules about people who are made to stay in a hospital or care home. They are meant to give people rights and make sure they are looked after properly and kept safe. (13)-(17) & (20)-(21). These rules (DoLS) need to be done again. They were meant to give people rights and make sure everything was done properly. They are very complicated, not good enough and not always used. The new rules need to: (a) be clear why they are needed; (b) be much easier to understand; (c) fit in with the rest of the MCA which people like; (d) make sure everyone who needs it has the protection of these rules. This includes people in supported living and in mental health wards. (18) Your local council can agree for a person to speak up for you. They are called an RPR (Relevant Person’s Representative). This needs to be made better so the right person gets the job and they are listened to. (19) The people who decide that someone should be made to stay in a hospital or care home should be checked themselves. To make sure they’re doing it properly. (22)-(24). Some people can get an advocate called an IMCA. IMCA means they are working under the MCA rules. People said these advocates were good and wanted them to do more. We think so too. IMCAs should be: (a) trained; (b) asked to be involved sooner; (c) asked to be more involved as well. People should be able to ask for an IMCA themselves. (25)-(26). If you are able to make decisions, you can say who you would like to make them for you if you can’t anymore. This is done using a legal document called an LPA or Lasting Power of Attorney. This puts in writing who can make decisions about things when you can’t. (25) Staff need to know more about LPAs and how the person named in one can make decisions for someone else. Councils need to tell people about LPAs and what they can do. We need new rules about what to do if services and others do not do what someone with an LPA has asked them to do. (26) You can write down that you do not want a particular treatment in the future when you might not be able to make a decision about it. This is called an Advance Decision. This helps if you are unable to say what you want because you are too ill. People need to know you can do this. Staff need to know people can do this and follow what has been written down. Health staff need to talk to people early on in an illness to help do this. These decisions need to be kept on patient’s records. (27)-(31) When someone can’t make a decision, there are some things that need to go to a special court to be decided. This is called the Court of Protection. They need to have more staff who can make decisions so it doesn’t take so long. The court is making changes to be more open so people can see what they do. We think that is a good thing. They need to be able to put their own words on their website so people know what they do. Before a problem goes to court, other ways to sort it out should be tried. New rules are needed about helping a case go to court. This is really important if it is the person who they think can’t make a decision who wants to do that. (32)-(34) We know there is not enough legal aid money to pay for everything. But we need to make sure people who have been seen as unable to speak up in court for themselves can still go to court if they need to. This is really important when someone is being made to stay in a hospital or care home. We want the government to look again at how much money there is to pay for people to speak up for them. (35) There is a law in the MCA about not neglecting or treating badly people who can’t make a decision. There have not been many cases that have gone to court using this law. Even the staff at Winterbourne View did not get charged with breaking this law. We think the government should look at this part of the MCA to make sure it does what it is meant to do. (36)-(39) We think the MCA should be checked more often to see if it is working properly. The right people to make sure this happens would be the organisation that is put in charge of the MCA (see point 3). They should also check what staff, people who use services and others think about decision making to see if any changes have happened. And we want a check made to see what changes have been made by government over the next year. See [[House of Lords Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005]]

:*'''Lucy Series, 'Blimey' (The Small Places Blog, 13/3/14).''' See [[House of Lords Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005]]

:*'''Alex Ruck Keene, 'The House of Lords has spoken - in no uncertain terms' (Mental Capacity Law and Policy Blog, 13/3/14).''' See [[House of Lords Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005]]

:*'''Alex Ruck Keene, 'The House of Lords Report 2 - a longer discussion' (Mental Capacity Law and Policy Blog, 13/3/14).''' See [[House of Lords Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005]]

===Independent Inquiry===
*'''Verita, 'Independent investigation into the death of CS: A report for Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust' (February 2014).''' See [[Independent inquiries]]

:*'''My Daft Life Blog, 'Our #justiceforLB summary statement' (1/3/14).''' See [[Independent inquiries]]

:*'''Bindmans LLP, 'Death of 18-year old Connor Sparrowhawk was preventable' (press release, 28/2/14).''' See [[Independent inquiries]]

:*'''Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, 'Publication of investigation report into the death of Connor Sparrowhawk' (press release, 24/2/14).''' See [[Independent inquiries]]

==Other==
===Legal Aid Agency===
*'''Legal Aid Agency: 'Civil face to face contracts from August 2014' page.''' This page contains documents relating to the tendering process for mental health and community care contracts which runs from 25/2/14 to noon on 25/3/14. See [[Legal Aid]]

===Newsletters===
*'''39 Essex Street, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 41, January 2014)'''. See [[39 Essex Street Mental Capacity Law Newsletter]]

:*'''Adrian Ward and Jill Stavert, 'Deprivation of liberty and adults with incapacity: a Scottish perspective' (January 2014)'''. See [[39 Essex Street Mental Capacity Law Newsletter]]

*'''39 Essex Street, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 42, February 2014)'''. See [[39 Essex Street Mental Capacity Law Newsletter]]

:*'''39 Essex Street, 'Good practice in the implementation of the DOLS safeguards, as drawn from the CQC's Report: Monitoring the use of the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in 2012-13' (February 2014)'''. See [[39 Essex Street Mental Capacity Law Newsletter]]

:*'''Adrian Ward, 'An introduction to Scottish adult incapacity law (1)' (January 2014)'''. See [[39 Essex Street Mental Capacity Law Newsletter]]

*'''39 Essex Street, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 43, March 2014)'''. See [[39 Essex Street Mental Capacity Law Newsletter]]

:*'''Ian Hunt, 'Adding a Bayes Leaf to the Law' (1/3/14)'''. Commentary on Mostyn J's approach to assessing and combining probabilities in Re D (a Child): A Local Authority v B and C [2014] EWHC 121 (Fam). See [[39 Essex Street Mental Capacity Law Newsletter]]

===New website===
*'''New website.''' Alex Ruck Keene of 39 Essex Street Chambers has today launched a website entitled 'Mental Capacity Law and Policy' with the motto 'Bringing together the best people and the best practice in the field of mental capacity'. See [[Other websites]]

==Books==
*'''New edition.''' {{bookold|cretney}}. See [[Books]]

*'''New book.''' {{bookold|elderlypeopleandthelaw}}. See [[Books]]

*'''New book.''' {{bookold|dementiaandthelaw}}. See [[Books]]

*'''New book.''' {{bookold|coercivecare}}. See [[Books]]

==Events==
*'''MHLA panel course.''' The Mental Health Lawyers Association will be running their successful two-day course for membership of the Law Society's Mental Health Accreditation Scheme (formerly the MHRT panel) in '''Newcastle''' on Tuesday '''22/4/14''' and Wednesday '''23/4/14'''. The course will also be held in '''London''' on Monday '''28/4/14''' and Tuesday '''29/4/14'''. Price: £300 (members); £390 (non-members); £250 (for third and subsequent members in a group). CPD: 12 SRA-accredited hours. See [http://www.mhla.co.uk/meetings-and-courses/accreditation-scheme-courses-in-2014/ MHLA website] for further details. See [[Events]]. [UPDATE 1/4/14: The London course sold out so a further London course is being held on '''12/5/14''' and '''13/5/14'''.]

*'''DOLS.''' Cardiff University and the Law Society are holding a conference entitled 'The Deprivation of Liberty Procedures: Safeguards for Whom?' on Friday '''13/6/14''' at the Law Society in Chancery Lane, London. The speakers are: Neil Allen, Peter Bartlett, Paul Bowen, Graham Enderby, Phil Fennell, Roger Hargreaves, Richard Jones, Sophy Miles, Mark Neary, Paula Scully, Lucy Series, and Susan Thompson. Price: £150. See [[Media:Cardiff University DOLS conference 13 Jun 2014.pdf|flyer]] for further information and booking form. See [[Events]]

==Website and CPD==
*'''CPD scheme.''' The CPD questionnaires for all months up to and including January 2014 are now online. Obtain 12 CPD points online for £60. For details see [[CPD scheme]]

*'''Annual Review 2013 published.''' The [[Annual Review 2013]] contains all news items, arranged thematically, which were added to the website during 2013. It is available in {{amazon|1495259927|paperback|x}} (130 pages) and {{amazon|B00HYP6G9I|Kindle|x}} versions. The [[Annual Review 2011]] and [[Annual Review 2012]] are also available. See [[Books]]

*'''Cases.''' On 31/3/14 Mental Health Law Online contained [[Mental health case law|1481 categorised cases]]

*'''Chronology.''' See [[March 2014 chronology]] for this month's changes to the website in date order.

==Twitter==
{{monthly|twitter|2014|3}}

[[Category:Updates]]