Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Clinical Director of Central Mental Hospital had been required by legislation to assess conditions of release
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court allows appeal from the Court of Appeal, and: (a) determines that an application for judicial review concerning the failure of the Clinical Director of the Central Mental Hospital to assess the conditions of release of a person deemed 'not guilty by reason of insanity' was not moot, on the grounds that there had been an alleged infringement of important constitutionally protected rights; (b) grants a declaration that the Clinical Director had failed to meet the statutory requirement to assess the conditions of release; and (c) adjourns for further consideration the question of whether the applicant was entitled to damages for breach of her rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Baker J (nem diss): Mental health - killing and attempted murder of children by mother - diagnosis of psychotic illness - reclassification as 'not guilty by reason of insanity' - Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 - detention under review - release in 2012 - conditions of release - place of residence - decision as to place of residence vested in treating psychiatrist in Central Mental Hospital (CMH) - refusal by Clinical Director of CMH in December 2013 - to assess and put in place arrangements necessary to facilitate variations in conditions of release - application for judicial review of decision - whether application moot - whether refusal lawful - nature of conditional discharge - test for mootness - whether a substantive lis remained - mootness on the facts - whether addition of a claim for damages could save proceedings from an argument of mootness - de minimus principle - whether claim derived from so minimal a breach as to justify dismissal - de minimis non curat lex, loosely translated as “the law will not concern itself with matters of minimal significance or trifles” - whether legislation created a mandatory obligation on the Clinical Director - cause of action - constitutional remedy.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
