The High Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction and authorised a deprivation of liberty in respect of the capacitous P.
In 2009 the criminal court imposed a hospital order under s.37 together with a restriction order under s.41 of the MHA after the P was convicted of serious sex offences. The P was discharged from hospital in 2016 pursuant to s.73 of the MHA on conditions which included a requirement to comply with his care and risk management plan. The plan, which the P consented to, amounted to a deprivation of his liberty. The court had to decide whether, following judgment in Secretary of State for Justice v MM  UKSC 60 (where the court ruled that the MHA does not permit either the First-tier Tribunal or the Secretary of State to impose conditions amounting to detention or a deprivation of liberty upon a conditionally discharged restricted patient), they could authorise a deprivation of liberty in respect of a capacitous individual.
The court decided it was appropriate to exercise the inherent jurisdiction in respect of the P and, accordingly authorised the deprivation of liberty which arose from the terms of the P’s community care plan for a period of twelve months.
Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii
Case summaries on every Court of Protection case & other relevant decisions with links to the full judgment where available.
Also of interest - just published
Get the latest cases & news delivered to your inbox with our free email updates.