MHA or MCA — a more flexible approach?
Following the judgment in Re A v SLAM, readers should consider the process they follow for deciding whether to admit or discharge patients who lack capacity.
Mr Justice Charles handed down this judgment as president of the Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber on 6 August 2013. We have saved our briefing note on this for your return from summer holidays — hopefully refreshed. It is of significance to any ‘decision maker’ considering whether or not to admit or discharge a patient under the Mental Health Act who may lack capacity.
It also fundamentally changes the previous position (set out by the same judge in GJ v A Foundation Trust) that, where there was a choice between the Mental Capacity Act and the Mental Health Act, the Mental Health Act had primacy…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the Mills & Reeve briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from The Lawyer
Analysis from The Lawyer
The trend for unbundling legal work is advancing through the law firm ranks but there is still resistance in some quarters - namely in-house. We asked why