Information for "MM v WL Clinic (2015) UKUT 644 (AAC)"
Basic information
| Display title | MM v WL Clinic [2015] UKUT 644 (AAC) |
| Default sort key | MM v WL Clinic (2015) UKUT 644 (AAC) |
| Page length (in bytes) | 1,183 |
| Page ID | 8304 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 1 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
Page protection
| Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
Edit history
| Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 20:58, 26 November 2015 |
| Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 11:54, 8 October 2021 |
| Total number of edits | 15 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Page properties
SEO properties
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | (1) For the purposes of Article 5, a restricted patient with the capacity to do so can give a valid and effective consent to conditions of a conditional discharge that when implemented will, on an objective assessment, create a deprivation of liberty. (2) In determining whether to discharge conditionally, the tribunal has to consider whether the consent is freely given and (as raised in KC at [134-139]) consider any practical problems arising from the ability to withdraw consent. (3) MM's case was remitted to the First-tier Tribunal with a direction that it apply the decisions in KC and this case. (Caution: see Court of Appeal decision.) |