On 6 April 2026, two further provisions of the Mental Health Act 2025 came into force – one of which has significant practical implications for private care providers and NHS commissioners.

The Mental Health Act 2025 (Commencement No. 1) Regulations 2026 brought into effect sections 51 and 52 of the Mental Health Act 2025 (MHA 2025). Section 51, which extends to all of the UK, closes a longstanding gap in human rights protection for psychiatric patients placed in private care.

Section 52, which extends to England only, mandates a government review of whether incident notification requirements relating to children in inpatient mental health settings ought to be extended. We explore both sections in more detail below.

If you require any further information or training on the new MHA 2025, please do not hesitate to contact our specialist team of mental health lawyers.

Section 51 MHA 2025: Extending the Human Rights Act to private care providers

What does it say?

Section 51 MHA 2025 inserts section 142C into the Mental Health Act 1983. This new section provides that a private care provider is to be regarded as “exercising a function of a public nature”, and therefore treated as a “public authority” under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). Accordingly, private care providers must act compatibly with Convention rights when providing certain “services” under the 1983 Act.

Those services include:

• After-care services provided under s.117 of the MHA 1983 (and its equivalent in Scotland), and
• Provision of medical treatment for, or assessment in relation to, mental disorder for an in-patient at a hospital, where that treatment or assessment is arranged or paid for by an NHS body.

What does this mean in practice?

This is a substantial change. Prior to section 51 coming into force, a private care provider was not automatically treated as a "public authority" under section 6 of the HRA.

• In R(A) v Partnership in Care Limited [2002] EWHC 529 (Admin), the Administrative Court held that a private psychiatric hospital exercising compulsory detention powers under the MHA performs functions of a public nature and is therefore a public authority under s.6 HRA. However, this did not extend to informal patients – meaning a private hospital was not automatically considered a public authority when treating or assessing an informal patient.
• In Sammut and ors v Next Steps Mental Health Care & Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust [2024] EWHC 2265 (KB), a civil claim for damages was brought under the HRA following the death of Mr Sammut in a nursing home operated by a private provider. The placement was jointly funded by the local authority, the Clinical Commissioning Group and NHS England under s.117 MHA aftercare. Despite this, the court held that the provider was not acting as a public authority but was simply carrying out a business for profit, and did not exercise any relevant statutory power. The claim was struck out.

Section 51 extends the HRA's reach to private care providers, meaning they will now be treated as a “public authority” for HRA purposes when providing services under section 117 of the 1983 Act and when treating or assessing both detained and informal psychiatric patients, where this is arranged or paid for by an NHS body.

Under section 6 of the HRA, it is unlawful for a public authority to act incompatibly with a Convention right – including the right to life (Article 2), the prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 3), the right to liberty (Article 5), and the right to respect for private life (Article 8). Private care providers may therefore face claims for damages under the HRA where they breach a patient’s Convention rights in providing such services.

Section 52 MHA: The Secretary of State's review of CQC notification requirements in relation to children

What does it say?

Regulation 18 of The Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009 requires CQC to be notified of specified incidents, including the placement of a child or young person under eighteen in an adult psychiatric unit where that placement has lasted for a continuous period exceeding 48 hours (see Regulation 18(2)(h)).

Section 52 MHA places a statutory duty on the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to review whether regulation 18 ought to be extended to require notifications to CQC in other cases where a child is an inpatient being treated for, or assessed in relation to, mental disorder. The review must also consider whether the 48-hour notification threshold for children placed in adult psychiatric units remains appropriate.

Subsections (2), (3) and (4) require the Secretary of State to publish a report setting out the review's conclusions and lay a copy before Parliament within 2 years of the Act receiving Royal Assent (i.e. by 18 December 2027). 

This provision is only relevant to England.

What does it mean in practice?

Section 52 does not itself change the notification requirements – it triggers a mandated government review with a statutory publication deadline. The purpose of the review is to ensure that where a child is admitted to a hospital (or registered establishment as defined in the MHA 1983), for treatment for, or assessment in relation to, mental disorder, notifications are made to the CQC in appropriate circumstances. The review will determine what, if any, other cases are to be notified so that the CQC is aware and can take any appropriate action. 

It is not yet clear what the review will find, but it could result in expanded notification obligations for healthcare providers, giving CQC greater visibility of children's inpatient mental health care and enhanced regulatory scrutiny. Providers and commissioners operating in England should keep a close watch on the outcome of this review, as it may necessitate changes to notification processes, governance arrangements, and CQC engagement strategies.

Practical takeaways

Section 51 MHA 2025 is the most significant and immediately actionable provision now in effect. Its commencement on 6 April 2026 creates new legal exposure for private care providers.

For private care providers

Private care providers will now be treated as a “public authority” for HRA purposes when providing services under section 117 of the MHA 1983 and when treating or assessing both detained and informal psychiatric patients, where this is arranged or paid for by an NHS body. This could result in an increase in civil claims for damages under the HRA where Convention rights are alleged to be breached.

Independent health and care providers should:

• Audit their care governance frameworks against the obligations imposed by the Convention rights, in particular Articles 2, 3, 5 and 8 of the ECHR;
• Ensure that policies on issues such as physical health monitoring, medication management, and patient safety are robust and properly implemented – gaps here will now be assessed not just as clinical negligence, but potentially as Convention violations;
• Consider training clinical and operational staff on the implications of HRA compliance.

For NHS commissioners and local authorities

When arranging or funding placements for NHS patients in private care facilities, or under section 117 MHA, commissioners must satisfy themselves that commissioned private providers are operating in an HRA-compliant manner. Due diligence on placement decisions is vital, and contracts should include appropriate compliance and audit obligations.

For organisations providing inpatient mental health care to children under eighteen in England

Keep an eye on the Secretary of State’s mandatory review of Regulation 18 of The Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009 – although the outcome is not expected for some time. We will keep you informed of any progress.