| 
 
  | 
 Cases Reported  | 
| AG v Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland | 1 | 
| Issue: Whether a transcript of a Tribunal hearing should be made; the correct appeal procedure; whether the Tribunal should appear at an appeal. | |
| Elizabeth Byrne v Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland | 2 | 
| Issue: Whether a decision to deny an adjournment was lawful; whether the Tribunal had acted in excess of jurisdiction in extending a Compulsory Treatment Order | |
| Sarah Beattie v Peter Dunbar, Mental Health Officer, and Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland | 7 | 
| Issue: Whether an application to a Tribunal had been validly made in light of the incomplete nature of one of the medical recommendations | |
| Annie McGlynn v Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland | 16 | 
| Issue: Whether a Tribunal erred in failing to consider the making of an interim Compulsory Treatment Order in relation to a patient detained under a short term detention certificate | |
| In the Petition of John Smith (Mental Health Officer) | 17 | 
| Issue: Whether the Tribunal acted unlawfully in failing to hold a hearing within the statutory time limit | |
| Brian Paterson v Sandra Kent, Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland and Fife Health Board | 20 | 
| Issue: Whether a Tribunal had jurisdiction to consider an application when it sat outside the statutory time limit; whether a failure to make an interim Compulsory Treatment Order and adjourn to allow the patient to obtain legal representation and an independent medical report was lawful | |
| Duncan Hughes (Curatory Ad Litem to PH) v Mental Health Tribunal | 29 | 
| Issue: Whether the failure of the Tribunal to pay the expenses of a curator ad litem who was a solicitor, so that he could not attend a substantive hearing, breached Art 6 European Convention | |
| R v Agnes Jane Carpenter | 32 | 
| Issue: The appropriate tariff for a defendant convicted of murder who was the instigator of a contract killing, but suffered from a personality disorder arising from childhood abuse, and was depressed at the time, of impaired intelligence and had suffered a brain injury. | |
| R v Gareth Richard Horton | 35 | 
| Issue: The appropriate tariff for a defendant convicted of murder who suffered from a depressive disorder. | |
| R v Rajesh Kumar Dass | 37 | 
| Issue: The appropriate tariff for a defendant convicted of murder who had a psychotic disorder, a personality disorder and a brain injury. | |
| JE v DE (by his litigation friend, the Official Solicitor), Surrey County Council and EW | 39 | 
| Issue: Whether a patient in a care home had been deprived of his liberty for the purposes of Art 5 European Convention | |
| R v H (AG’s Reference No 126 of 2006) | 64 | 
| Issue: The appropriate tariff for a juvenile defendant convicted of murder who had an adjustment disorder. | |
| R (Johnson and others) v LB Havering; YL (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) v Birmingham City Council and others | 69 | 
| Issue: Whether previous authority holding that a private care home is not a public authority for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998 was binding and correct. | |
| YL (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) v Birmingham City Council | 85 | 
| Issue: Whether a private care home is a public authority for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998. | |
| R (TB) v Stafford Crown Court | 115 | 
| Issue: The procedure to be followed before a Crown Court orders the disclosure of the psychiatric records of a prosecution witness. | |
| R (Buckowicki) v Northamptonshire County Council | 121 | 
| Issue: Whether it was open to a local authority to decline to accept a client for guardianship when a criminal court wished to make a guardianship order | |
| M v UK | 129 | 
| Issue: Whether a friendly settlement should be approved; whether the absence of a provision allowing a patient to change her nearest relative breached Art 8 ECHR | |
| Sheffield City Council v E and S | 131 | 
| Issue: The test for capacity to marry. | |
| X City Council v MB, NB and MAB | 155 | 
| Issue: Whether capacity to marry includes capacity to engage in sexual relations; the test for capacity to engage in sexual relations. | |
| St Helens BC v PE and JW | 169 | 
| Issue: Whether declarations made under the inherent jurisdiction should affirm the lawfulness of conduct or merely that it was in the best interests of the subject. | |
| Local Authority X v MM and KM | 173 | 
| Issue: Whether MM had capacity to decide where to live, whether to marry or to have sexual relations; what her best interests required. | |
| City of Sunderland v PS and CA | 196 | 
| Issue: Whether deprivation of liberty could be authorised under the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction; whether a receiver could be appointed under s37 Supreme Court Act 1981 in relation to a vulnerable adult. | |
| LLBC v TG, JG and TR | 203 | 
| Issue: Whether an ex parte order for the placement in a care home of a man without capacity to decide where to live had been justified; whether it breached Arts 5 and 8 ECHR | |
| R (N) v Mental Health Review Tribunal | 219 | 
| Issue: Whether a tribunal had erred in concluding that a paedophile suffered from psychopathic disorder; whether a decision not to adjourn for oral evidence was unlawful. | |
| R (Holloway) v Oxfordshire County Council and Others | 225 | 
| Issue: Whether an ex parte interim displacement was properly sought; whether the order made was within the jurisdiction of the judge, and whether a s3 order made subsequently amounted to lawful detention. | |
| R (SH) v Mental Health Review Tribunal | 234 | 
| Issue: Whether the failure of a Tribunal to lift a requirement that a conditionally discharged patient accept medication that he was willing to accept on a voluntary basis breached his fundamental rights and so was unlawful. | |
| R (RD) v Mental Health Review Tribunal | 241 | 
| Issue: Whether a tribunal medical member had breached r11 Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983 and/or Art 5(4) ECHR; the adequacy of the tribunal’s reasons. | |
| R (Rayner and Marsh) v Home Secretary and Others | 249 | 
| Issue: Whether the statutory scheme relating to the making of references to the Mental Health Review Tribunal following a recall to hospital of a conditionally discharged restricted patient and the timing of the hearing was compatible with Art 5(4) ECHR; whether there had been a breach of the right to a speedy hearing on the facts and who was responsible. | |
| CPS v P | 262 | 
| Issue: Whether a decision to stay a summary trial as the defendant could not participate was correct; whether the district judge should have proceeded under s37 Mental Health Act 1983; whether the defence of doli incapax remained. | |
| R (Surat Singh) v Stratford Magistrates Court | 274 | 
| Issue: The proper approach to issues of insanity arising in a summary trial | |
| Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police | 282 | 
| Issue: Whether a failure to obtain leave in accordance with s139 Mental Health Act 1983 before bringing civil proceedings in respect of acts purportedly done under the Act rendered the proceedings a nullity | |
| Kerrie Francis Gray v Thames Trains Ltd and Network Rail | 295 | 
| Issue: Whether a cause of action by a man suffering a mental disorder who committed a manslaughter was barred on public policy grounds. | |
| R (MM) v Home Secretary | 304 | 
| Issue: Whether warrants of recall in relation to a conditionally discharged patient were lawful | |
| R v Dean Johnson | 310 | 
| Issue: Whether in relation to insanity the issue was whether the defendant knew his action was legally or morally wrong | |
| R v Amolak Singh Chal | 313 | 
| Issue: Whether hearsay evidence was admissible in proceedings to determine whether an accused found unfit to stand trial had committed the actus reus of the offence charged. | |
| R v Daniel Richard House | 318 | 
| Issue: Whether a minimum term should have been specified in relation to a life sentence accompanied with a hospital direction | |
| R v Jonathan Paul Simpson | 320 | 
| Issue: Whether the judge had been correct to impose life imprisonment rather than a hospital order with a restriction order because of public safety concerns | |