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.
Leave required from court to bring claim against State concerning mental health treatment
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal from the High Court, and affirmed a decision to strike out a claim concerning the plaintiff's treatment with 'depot neuroleptic medication' without his consent, on the grounds that leave from the court had not been obtained as required by the mental health legislation. The Court of Appeal further concluded that the proceedings against the Attorney General, which challenged the constitutionality of section 57(1) of the Mental Health Act, could not be separated from the invalidated claim against the HSE and thus were also struck out. The Court of Appeal's judgment clarifies that non-compliance with the statutory leave requirement constitutes a jurisdictional bar, not merely a procedural irregularity, and that such proceedings are a nullity from the outset.
Mental Health Act 2001, section 73(1), pre-litigation leave, High Court, Court of Appeal, jurisdictional bar, civil proceedings, Health Service Executive (HSE), Attorney General, constitutional challenge, section 57(1), invalid proceedings, statutory immunity, non-consensual treatment, judicial interpretation, procedural irregularity, nullity.
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.
