June 2016 chronology

See June 2016 update for a thematic summary of these changes.

30/06/16 (1): King's College London: Mental Health, Ethics and Law MSc. This MSc programme will equip students to become leaders in mental health policy, law or practice. It has been designed for health care professionals, lawyers, policy makers, and all those with a relevant first degree who are keen to consider the difficult questions raised by mental ill health and society's response. Benefits of the programme include that it: (1) Offers in-depth and integrated clinical, philosophical and legal analysis of key issues in the field of mental health. (2) Is supported by the UK's first centre of medical law and ethics (CMLE) and Europe’s largest centre for research and teaching in psychiatry, psychology and neuroscience (IoPPN). (3) Is located in central London and maintains close links with national and international policy formers and leading legal and clinical practitioner communities. For further information on this course, please visit the King’s online prospectus.

23/06/16 (1): Manchester University/AMHPA: Taking Stock conference - Manchester, 21/10/16. — No results

22/06/16 (2): Northumbria University: Achieving Justice Conference - Newcastle, 8/10/16 - 9/10/16. — No results

22/06/16 (1): Job advert. Cygnet Hospital, Bury - MHA Administrator Applicants should be working in an MHA role already. The starting salary is £18,000, or £20,000 for those with the MHA Law & Practice Certification. For more details, including how to apply, see the Jobs page. (Job vacancies can be listed here for a small fee.)

20/06/16 (1): Housing case. McDonald v McDonald [2016] UKSC 28, [2016] MHLO 20 — Click on link to view page.§

19/06/16 (1): EU referendum. Please read this book if you are interested in the referendum: Template:Book

12/06/16 (1): Appeal status information. The claim against Enfield in TW v Enfield Borough Council [2014] EWCA Civ 362, [2014] MHLO 26 was ultimately settled for £27,000. Thanks to Helen Curtis of Garden Court Chambers and Michael Paget of Cornerstone Chambers for providing this information (emails 9/6/16 and 10/6/16). Similar information relating to other cases is always welcome: please get in touch. Here is a summary of the Court of Appeal decision — The duty to consult under s11(4), the R (E) v Bristol case, and the Code of Practice, were all considered in light of Article 5 and Article 8. Overturning the High Court's decision, the Court of Appeal stated: "In summary, it seems to me that, as a matter of construction of section 11(4), when an [AMHP] is considering whether it is 'reasonably practicable' to consult the 'nearest relative' before making an application to admit a mental patient pursuant to section 3(1) and 13(1) of the MHA 1983 (in its form as at 29 June 2007), the section imposes on the [AMHP] an obligation to strike a balance between the patient's Article 5 right not to be detained unless that is done by a procedure that is in accordance with the law and the patient's Article 8(1) right to her private life." §

11/06/16 (1): Life sentence appeal case. R v Ahmed [2016] EWCA Crim 670, [2016] MHLO 19 — Click on link to view page.§

09/06/16 (2): Appeal status information. The claim against Durham in DD v Durham County Council [2013] EWCA Civ 96, [2013] MHLO 31 was ultimately discontinued. Thanks to Chris Buttler of Matrix Chambers for providing this information (email 4/4/16). Similar information relating to other cases is always welcome: please get in touch. Here is a summary of the Court of Appeal decision — DD wished to bring proceedings against local authorities arguing that (a) the two assessing AMHPs owed a duty to him (a legal responsibility not only for assessing whether the patient should be detained, but also for the suitability of the hospital at which the patient was to be detained and the regime under which he would be held); (b) that by making the application for admission, each was in breach of duty; and (c) that the county council was responsible vicariously for that breach of duty. (1) The Court of Appeal (reversing the High Court decision in this respect) decided that the argument was sufficient for leave under s139 to bring proceedings to be granted. (2) DD should not have been made responsible for the costs of Middlesbrough City Council.§

07/06/16 (1): Job advert. Mackintosh Law, London - Mental Capacity and Community Care Lawyers. Mackintosh Law are recruiting for two solicitors: one supervisor and one other solicitor. See Jobs

02/06/16 (1): Law Society, 'Practice note: Representation before mental health tribunals' (27/5/16). This document 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. See Law Society practice note on representation before Mental Health Tribunals