Welsh Ministers v PJ [2018] UKSC 66
This Supreme Court case considered the interplay between Community Treatment Orders under the Mental Health Act 1983 and deprivation of liberty.
This Supreme Court case considered the interplay between Community Treatment Orders under the Mental Health Act 1983 and deprivation of liberty.
Background
PJ had been detained in hospital and discharged under a Community Treatment Order (CTO) with conditions that amounted to a DoL.
The patient, PJ, is 47 years old. He is described in evidence as having "mild to borderline learning disability … He has also been assessed recently as having difficulties which fall within the autistic spectrum. This has been accompanied by abnormally aggressive and seriously irresponsible behaviour consisting of violent and sexual offending."
PJ was subject to a CTO that imposed three bespoke conditions under section 17B(2) of the MHA including to reside at a named care home and to abide by the rules and also to comply with the care plan drawn up by multidisciplinary team.
There was agreement that the conditions of the CTO amounted to an objective deprivation of liberty. In particular PJ’s whereabouts were monitored at all times within the unit, with 15 minute observations and he was escorted by staff on all community outings, including when attending college and meeting his girlfriend.
There was also agreement that PJ had the capacity to consent to the care plan and to the conditions in the CTO. The evidence before the tribunal was that he was happy to stay at the care home and understood that the CTO brought benefits because he needed clear boundaries, but that he would like more freedom to see his family and his girlfriend.
PJ applied to the tribunal which refused his application for discharge. The Upper Tribunal overturned that decision, declaring that the Tribunal should have used its power of discharge to stop the ongoing breach of the patient’s ECHR article 5 rights (the right to liberty).
The Court of Appeal held that the Responsible Clinician’s (RC) power to restrict the freedom of movement of a patient to the extent of objectively depriving him of his liberty by the conditions attached to a CTO was permitted as part of the MHA statutory framework. The Court of Appeal also held that the remedy for any illegality, including any Convention illegality such as a breach of Article 5 ECHR, is to challenge the CTO by way of an application for judicial review.
The Supreme Court Judgment
The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal. The Court declared that there is no power to impose conditions in a Community Treatment Order which have the effect of objectively depriving a patient of his liberty, in a judgment consistent with the Supreme Court’s reasoning set out in the linked case of MM.
In their reasoning the Court commented that it is a fundamental principle of statutory construction that a power expressed in general words should not be construed to interfere with fundamental rights such as the right to liberty of the person.
The Court quoted the earlier case of R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115, at p 131:
“Fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words….In the absence of express language or necessary implication to the contrary, the courts therefore presume that even the most general words were intended to be subject to the basic rights of the individual.”
They noted that there is no power to detain a patient on a CTO, no power to impose medical treatment without consent, and no sanction for failing to comply with the care plan, other than the limited power of recall. The court commented that if the CTO patient cannot be made to take their medication, how can Parliament have intended an even greater interference with their fundamental rights? In addition whilst there is a limited power of recall, there is no power similar to that for section 2 or 3 patients to recapture them if they breach the care plan or are absent without leave.
They also commented that the 2007 amendments to the 1983 Act were preceded by lengthy examination and consultation; the Royal College of Psychiatrists had long been pressing for some means of ensuring that detained patients kept up with their medication and did not get lost after being discharged from hospital. However these calls for coercive treatment in the community were rejected as there was great opposition to any form of compulsory or forcible medical treatment outside the carefully controlled environment of a hospital.
As regards the second issue raised of the interplay between the patient’s ECHR rights and the Tribunal’s powers, Lady Hale held that:
“33.[…] The MHRT has no jurisdiction over the conditions of treatment and detention in hospital, but these can be relevant to whether the statutory criteria for detention are made out, especially in borderline cases…..[the patient’s] treatment and care may well feature in the debate about whether he should be discharged…….The patient’s actual situation on the ground may well be relevant to whether the criteria for the CTO are made out. Furthermore, if the tribunal identifies a state of affairs amounting to an unlawful deprivation of liberty, it must be within its powers to explain to all concerned what the true legal effect of a CTO is. But the patient can only apply to the tribunal once during each period for which the CTO lasts (six months, six months, then once a year). If the reality is that he is being unlawfully detained, then the remedy is either habeas corpus or judicial review”
Comment
In light of the recent related MM judgment, this judgment and reasoning is not unexpected and accords with the existing MHA Code of Practice and original purpose of CTOs as discussed at length in the lead up to the 2007 Act.
For judgment, see following link: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2018-0037-judgment.pdfRelated expertise
You may be interested in...
Online Event
Data Shared Insights: Information sharing – why, when, how?
Online Event - Shared Insights
Shared Insights with Irwin Mitchell: Improving communication with patients and families
Published Article
Investing in healthcare in Saudi Arabia under the new regulatory framework
Opinion
Carer's Leave Bill set to become law
Legal Update
New regulatory pathways announced for innovative medical technologies and internationally approved medicines
Online Event
Mock Inquest Training Sessions
Opinion
Junior doctors vote unanimously in favour of strike action
Opinion
BMA issues medical locum rate card for junior doctors
Guide
Government response to the consultation on the Higher-Risk Buildings Regulations
Published Article
The first 100 days for Integrated Care Boards
Legal Update
Safeguarding at scale report published
Legal Update - Shared Insights
Shared Insights: Looking ahead to 2023 – what Health and Care employers need to know
Legal Update
LPS consultation and ‘go live’ planning
Published Article
How AI and technology can transform the healthcare sector
On-Demand
Leadership and lessons learnt during the Pandemic by Professor Jonathan Van-Tam
Opinion
NHS England – Updated Transaction Guidance
NHS England has published (October 2022) new guidance - Assuring and supporting complex change: Statutory transactions, including mergers and acquisitions.
Opinion
NHS England – Assuring and supporting complex change
NHS England has issued an updated (publication 11 October 2022) suite of Complex Change guidance about how it will assure and support proposals for complex change that are reportable to it. New and (where it is still in force) existing Complex Change guidance are as follows.
Guide
Highlights from the Health and Care Connect Conference
Legal Update
Health and Care Regulation – The Present and the Future
In this article, we discuss some of the themes we have seen in recent CQC regulation as well as providing an update on the development of their new assessment framework. I will also highlight other key developments in the sector that all providers should be aware of.
On-Demand
ICS Forum webinar series: New rules for service reconfiguration
This on-demand webinar looks at the Secretary of State’s new powers under the Health & Care Act 2022 & impact on current approach for healthcare providers.
On-Demand
ICS Forum webinar series: What’s new for ICSs?
Presented by Gerard Hanratty, this on-demand webinar looks into the key new functions for Integrated Care Systems under the new Health & Care Act 2022. It provides a useful update on what is new, how it may be interpreted and what issues may arise.
Legal Update - Shared Insights
Shared Insights: Coroners' Question Time
In this session, our speakers discussed fundamentals of disclosure, general points on disclosure & Post-Pandemic, interested Persons & Patient Safety Incident Response, and how we can help & Takeaway Tips.
On-Demand
LPS - it's out - what do you need to know? Part 3: the practicalities of implementation
This on-demand session deals with what we now know so far about the finer detail of the LPS proposals, particularly focussing on the practicalities of implementing the LPS system.Legal Update
Health & Care Matters newsletter - June 2022
Welcome to our latest health newsletter for Summer 2022. We have a packed edition which includes fascinating insights from clients and our own lawyers into the potential impact of the Health and Care Act 2022 and associated DHSC integration policy.
Opinion - Maternity services
The impact of COVID-19 on maternal deaths
HSIB published its report on Maternal deaths during the first wave of COVID-19. The report takes a closer look at the impact that COVID-19 had during the initial period of March to May 2020.
Legal Update - Shared Insights
Shared Insights: Overview of inquests in relation to deaths in custody
In this session, our speakers discussed gave an overview of inquests in relation to deaths in custody and discussed three key themes; Documentation Provision, Communication, and Decision making. They also discussed Healthcare in a prison setting - manging the unique challenges.
On-Demand
LPS - it's out - what do you need to know? Part 2: the most significant changes
This on-demand session considers some of the most significant changes to the Code.Legal Update
When does the treatment of residents of care homes meet the article 2 and article 3 thresholds?
Residents of care homes are particularly vulnerable members of our society, with higher risks of incidents and fatal injuries, which unfortunately can be as a result of suffering ill-treatment. Courts can be faced with the difficult task of determining whether the treatment amounts to a breach of the individual’s rights.
Opinion
Local Health Systems: Relationships not structures
The Local Government Information Unit’s Local Democracy Research Centre report, there are calls for a reinvigorated role for local government as leaders of local health systems, to develop and strengthen relationships of trust, transparency and cooperation.
On-Demand
LPS - it's out - what do you need to know?' Part 1: Regulations and Code of Practice
This on-demand session deals with what we now know so far about the finer detail of the LPS proposals, particularly focussing on the practicalities of implementing the LPS system.Legal Update - Maternity services
The Ockenden Final Report – a blueprint for safe maternity care from ward to Board
The much anticipated final Ockenden report was published on 30 March 2020. The final report sets out the findings of the review into care provided to 1,486 families, and sets out a blueprint for safe maternity care.
Opinion
LPS - it’s out
The long-awaited draft Mental Capacity Act Code of Practice, including the Liberty Protection Safeguards (“LPS”), has landed.
Legal Update
Health & Care Matters newsletter - February 2022
Welcome to our first health newsletter of 2022.
Legal Update
Themes in health and social care for 2022
2021 saw the combination of two challenges. The first was a general under-supply of workers in the health and care sector. The second involved greatly increased and often unpredictable levels of staff absence, through illness or ‘close contact’ isolation.
Legal Update
Deal activity and market update in health and social care sector
In the last nine months of 2021 we saw a huge amount of activity across all sub-sectors of health and social care.
Legal Update
The Liberty Protection Safeguards: brief update
The Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) will be used to authorise the proportionate and necessary deprivation of liberty for people aged 16 and above who lack the mental capacity to consent to their care arrangements.
On-Demand
VCOD and healthcare workers – Getting ready to meet the requirement
We invite you to an on-demand webinar looking at the key legal and practical implications for healthcare employers arising from the NHS England VCOD Guidance and actions required in Phase 2 implementation stage.
Legal Update - Shared Insights
Shared Insights: Preparing for 2022 – the big issues for legal teams across health and social care
We were delighted to be joined by Dr Nigel Sturrock, Regional Medical Director for the Midlands at NHS England and NHS Improvement. He gave an overview of the pressures placed on the NHS by the pandemic, including the impact on urgent and emergency care, elective procedures and staffing.
Published Article
Care Quality Commission Strategy from 2021 – Ground for Optimism but Much Still to Learn
There is much still to learn about how the strategy will be implemented and those details will play a huge part in determining the final outcome. However, there are grounds for optimism.
On-Demand
Care Business Briefing - Deal activity dynamics in the healthcare sector
Join Browne Jacobson and Virgin Money for an on-demand webinar as they discussed their thoughts on the outlook for acquisition activity and funding in the health and care sectors.