View source for R (SP) v SSJ (2010) EWCA Civ 1590

''The Secretary of State for Justice was entitled to rely on a medical recommendation under [[s47]] which did not explicitly address the new 'appropriate treatment' test: (1) his case workers are not concerned to pursue medical reasoning, but only to see whether the expert had given some reasons which they considered adequate and did not conflict with the facts known or the statutory requirements; (2) he was entitled to give the reports a sensible meaning, and to satisfy himself that the 'appropriate treatment' test was met by reference to matters which had been in the report by necessary implication.'' [Summary based on All ER (D) report of ex tempore judgment]

==Related cases==
[[R (SP) v SSJ (2010) All ER (D) 308 (Nov)]]

*[[R (SP) v SSJ (2010) EWHC 1124 (Admin)]]

==Other==
Before: Arden, Sullivan and Tomlinson LJJ

Date: 23/11/10 (judgment given ex tempore)

Hugh Southey QC (instructed by RMNJ Solicitors) for the claimant

Gemma White (instructed by Treasury Solicitors) for the Secretary of State

==Citations==
[2010] All ER (D) 308 (Nov)

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2010) EWCA Civ 1590}}

[[Media:R (SP) v SSJ (2010) EWCA Civ 1590.pdf|Transcript]]

[[Category:Unlawful detention cases]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2010 cases]]