2025

Cases Reported

Thierry Ehrmann v France	1
Issue: Whether the failure to follow procedural protections for a person with disabilities breached his right to a fair trial; whether a finding of inadmissibility by the ECtHR meant that the Human Rights Committee could not consider the matter.

VI v Republic of Moldova	11
Issue: Whether the placement of a child with an intellectual disability in a psychiatric hospital, including on an adult unit, and the conditions of detention and treatment breached Arts 3 and/or 8 ECHR, Art 13 and Art 14.

R v Kamaladin Ismael	51
Issue: Whether convictions should be set aside on the basis that the defendant was unfit to stand trial; whether the lawyers for the defendant failed to act on evidence as to unfitness to stand trial that was available prior to sentence; the powers of the Court of Appeal.

R v Valdo Calocane (Reference by HM Solicitor General under s36 Criminal Justice Act 1988)	63
Issue: Whether orders under ss37/41 Mental Health Act 1983 rather than life imprisonment with an order under s45A of the 1983 Act for offences of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility and attempted murder were unduly lenient in light of the medical evidence as to the causation of the offending and the risk posed.

R v Jamie Edwin Barrow	77
Issue: The correct minimum term of imprisonment for a defendant who had killed 3 people via arson; whether his personality disorders reduced culpability.

R v Joshua Gilligan	87
Issue: Whether a custodial sentence for robbery should have been suspended in light of the mental health of the defendant.

R v AYP	91
Issue: Whether a judge had been entitled to order to lie on the file a charge of possession of a bladed instrument when the defendant had been seeking help for mental health delusions and had spent more time in custody than would be imposed as a sentence but the prosecution decided that there was a public interest in proceeding with the charge.

Surrey Police v (1) PC (by his litigation friend, the Official Solicitor), (2) Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and (3) Surrey County Council	97
Issue: The steps to be taken if an application is to be made for a High Court order to deprive a person of their liberty in a police cell when a bed in a psychiatric hospital is not available and there are doubts about the legal framework for detention; who should pay the costs of the Official Solicitor.

Re MK: Deprivation of Liberty and Tier 4 Beds	103
Issue: Whether the court should authorise the detention in a general paediatric ward of a child at risk of self-harm and death who met the criteria for detention under s2 Mental Health Act 1983 but was refused a bed in a closed unit because it was thought to be counter-therapeutic; the impact of Art 2 ECHR.

OO v (1) Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust and (2) Secretary of State for Justice	109
Issue: Whether a Tribunal had erred in law in failing to adjourn to allow a restricted patient to obtain an independent psychiatric report when a previous responsible clinician supported a deferred conditional discharge but a new responsible clinician opposed such a course; the requirements of equality of arms in the context; the impact of reliance on medical reports by other psychiatrists not called to give evidence but to whom the responsible clinician deferred.

William Sartin v R	118
Issue: Whether it was proper for the judge who had discharged a jury in light of jury tampering to continue with a judge-alone trial in circumstances including making findings in fitness to stand trial proceedings that the defendant had exaggerated the severity of his depression and memory loss and expressing a provisional view when the defendant did not appear on the first day of trial because of an apparent suicide attempt that the defendant might be seeking to delay the trial.

(1) North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust and (2) Tees Esk and Wear Valley NHS Trust v (1) KAG (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor), (2) Mr G and (3) Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council	126
Issue: Whether providing nutrition and hydration through a percutaneous gastrostomy tube for a patient detained under s3 Mental Health Act 1983 who had severe depression and was refusing to eat or drink was treatment covered by s63 of the Act; whether a declaration to that effect should be granted under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court; costs.

Victoria Goldsmith v R	132
Issue: Whether in relation to a defendant found unfit to stand trial, the jury considering whether the defendant committed the act of possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply had to consider whether the prosecution had proved the intention to supply or only had to consider whether the prosecution had proved possession, including awareness, and that the substance possessed was a controlled drug; the principles to be applied in determining what had to be considered by the jury.

Tarjit Singh v R	143
Issue: Whether an extended sentence of 13 years for assault by penetration was manifestly excessive in light of mental health matters and gender dysphoria.

(1) Mark Anthony Sammut (on his own behalf and as Administrator of the Estate of Paul Sammut (Deceased)), (2) Patricia Sammut, (3) Claire Sammut, (4) Dillan Sammut v (1) Next Steps Mental Healthcare Ltd (formerly K Bond Healthcare Ltd t/a Next Steps, (2) Greater Manchester NHS Foundation Trust	151
Issue: Whether a private nursing home was exercising functions of a public nature for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998; whether the circumstances in which a patient died from side effects linked to treatment for schizophrenia engaged Art 2 ECHR; whether civil claims under the 1998 should be struck out or subject to summary judgment in favour of the private nursing home.

Oliver Campbell v R	158
Issue: Whether convictions for murder and conspiracy to rob which rested in part on admissions by a man with intellectual impairments were safe in light of further research on false confessions; whether a retrial should be ordered.

Aftanache v Romania	177
Issue: Whether taking to a psychiatric hospital someone who needed insulin treatment for diabetes breached Arts 2 and 5(1) ECHR.

Peterborough City Council v Mother, Father and SM (a Child, through the Children’s Guardian)	190
Issue: Whether there was a deprivation of liberty in the arrangements made for a 12-year-old with profound disabilities who needed constant supervision and care but who was not capable of leaving the premises where care was provided.

Tyler Lukes v (1) Kent & Medway NHS & Social Care Partnership Trust and (2) Chief Constable of Kent Police	197
Issue: Whether claims in negligence for failing to assess the mental health state of a man who later suffered significant injuries jumping from a bridge should be struck out; whether summary judgment should be granted.

R v ABY	223
Issue: Whether convictions for serious sexual offending were safe in light of further evidence that the complainant had made allegations of sexual offending against others that either led to an acquittal or were accepted to have been false allegations made whilst she was mentally ill.

FIJ (on behalf of EOJ, SJ and EJ) v Sweden	237
Issue: Whether the deportation to Nigeria of a family that included 2 children with various disabilities, including autism and intellectual disability, would breach various articles of the CRPD; whether the failure to hear from one of the children, who was 7 at the time the domestic proceedings to challenge removal were commenced, breached Art 7(3) CRPD.

R v Matthew James Banner and Peter Bennett	247
Issue: Whether convictions of ill-treatment of persons detained under s3 Mental Health Act 1983 should be quashed for failures (i) to define ill-treatment or (ii) to rule that there was no case to answer.

FGH v R	252
Issue: Whether leave to appeal a conviction for possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life should be given in light of a subsequent finding that the applicant was a victim of trafficking and additional psychiatric evidence.

R v Ozzie Cush, Paul Williams, Dylan Willis and Aminadab Temesgen	258
Issue: Whether sentences for participation in serious public disturbances were too long; the impact of mental health matters, including in whether a custodial sentence should be suspended.

KK v Ukraine	267
Issue: Whether there was a breach of Art 5(1) ECHR from placement in a psychiatric hospital; whether there was detention; whether there was ill-treatment and/or an inadequate investigation in breach of Art 3.

IN v St Andrews Healthcare	272
Issue: Whether a Tribunal had erred in law in failing to adjourn when a patient with capacity had failed to provide instructions to the legal representative appointed under r11(7)(a) Tribunal Procedure Rules 2008 and the legal representative had then withdrawn from the hearing; the proper approach when a patient with capacity declines to provide instructions.

ET v Republic of Moldova	289
Issue: Whether the lack of any process for a person deprived of capacity to apply directly to a court for its restoration breached Art 6(1) ECHR; whether there was discrimination in breach of Art 14 taken with Art 8.

MP v Denmark (dec)	307
Issue: Whether a friendly settlement of €30,000 for damages and costs for breaching Art 3 ECHR by twice tying a person to a restraint bed in a psychiatric hospital was based on respect for human rights.

Tsyoge fon Manteyfel v Ukraine	308
Issue: Whether Arts 5(1), (4) and (5) ECHR were breached by ongoing detention in a psychiatric hospital after a court order had expired; whether victim status was lost by a domestic court award of a lesser amount than would be granted by the ECtHR but which had not been paid.

Lypovchenko and Halabudenco v Republic of Moldova and Russia (digest)	310
Issue: Whether there were breaches of several rights under the ECHR in relation to action taken by the de facto courts of the self-proclaimed “Moldovan Republic of Transnistria”, including of Art 3 from psychiatric treatment that was not medically necessary; the responsibility of Moldova and Russia.

Aleksandar Cvetkoski v North Macedonia (dec)	314
Issue: Whether a friendly settlement of €2350 for damages and costs in relation to a breach of Art 5(1) ECHR from compulsory confinement in a closed psychiatric hospital was based on respect for human rights.

Giuseppe Giorgio v Italy (dec)	315
Issue: Whether it was justified to continue to consider a case after an offer to pay €12,500 for non-pecuniary damages and €2,000 for costs for a breach of Art 3 ECHR from detention in prison of a man whose mental health condition was incompatible with it and who received inadequate mental health treatment.

Cihat Taskiran v Denmark (dec)	316
Issue: Whether a friendly settlement of €20,000 for damages (plus costs) for breaching Art 3 ECHR by confining a person in a restraint bed in a psychiatric hospital was based on respect for human rights.

Liiban Abdirisaak Ahmadi v Denmark (dec)	317
Issue: Whether a friendly settlement of €25,000 for damages (plus costs) for breaching Art 3 ECHR by confining a person to a restraint bed in a high security psychiatric hospital was based on respect for human rights.

LT v Ukraine	318
Issue: Whether Art 6 ECHR was breached by a trial without the presence of the defendant and findings that she committed the criminal act, was not responsible in light of mental disorder but needed to be detained in a psychiatric hospital; whether the conduct of her lawyers was adequate; whether it was proper for domestic law to preclude an appeal being lodged by the defendant.

Vasilii Nițu v Republic of Moldova	331
Issue: Whether failing to offer adequate treatment to a prisoner with a personality disorder that led to aggression and self-harm, met by isolation and disciplinary action, breached Art 3 ECHR; whether it was necessary to consider a specific incident of use of force.

TV v Croatia	334
Issue: Whether there were breaches of the substantive limb of Art 2 ECHR from the way police and medical personnel interacted with a man known to have schizophrenia and showing signs of distress, who died whilst being transported to hospital; and of its procedural limb from the length and adequacy of the investigation.

ES v Finland (dec)	346
Issue: Whether payment of €4000 for a breach of Art 8 ECHR through 5 instances of compulsory medication when domestic law did not provide a court remedy to control such action meant that the person affected no longer had victim status.

AZ v Italy	348
Issue: Whether the detention in prison of a man with severe depression and a personality disorder, who repeatedly made suicide attempts, breached Art 3 ECHR; whether Arts 2 and 5 were also breached.

Validity Foundation on behalf of TJ v Hungary	353
Issue: Whether there were breaches of the substantive and procedural limbs of Art 2 ECHR from the inadequate care offered and poor living conditions in a home where a resident died from pneumonia; whether a non-governmental organisation had standing to make the application; whether it was lodged in time.

Age Nils Haugen v Norway	369
Issue: Whether Arts 2 and 13 ECHR were breached by the suicide in prison of X, who had known mental health problems, was on remand on charges of murder, had been transferred briefly from prison to hospital because of concerns about suicide but then returned to prison, and committed suicide shortly after being moved to normal location from a close supervision unit; whether the applicant, whose criminal complaint did not lead to proceedings, had failed to exhaust domestic remedies by not bringing a civil claim or a complaint to the Ombud.

Matteo Lavorgna v Italy	393
Issue: Whether the use of mechanical restraint on a psychiatric patient who had attacked others breached Art 3 ECHR; whether its continuation for 8 days breached Art 3; the adequacy of the investigation.

CV v Italy (dec)	418
Issue: Whether a declaration accepting breaches of Arts 3, 5, 6, 13 and 34 from unlawful detention in conditions that were inadequate for mental health, failure to comply with a court order to move the person to a specialised location, lack of a domestic remedy and delay in complying with an interim measure, together with €24,684 for non-pecuniary damage and €3000 for costs was adequate.

Cherednychenko v Ukraine	419
Issue: Whether Art 5(1) ECHR was breached by detention in a psychiatric hospital after a court order had expired and before a further court order was made; whether a failure to hear a habeas corpus application at all and a delay of 7 days between the making of a habeas corpus application and an order renewing detention breached Art 5(4).

Conwy County Borough Council v PR, LR, SB (through her Children’s Guardian, Lorraine Fozzard) and Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board; Re SB	423
Issue: Whether, in the context of its inherent jurisdiction to detain a vulnerable child, the High Court could make a finding as to whether the child could be detained under s3 Mental Health Act 1983.

Clipea and Grosu v Republic of Moldova	432
Issue: Whether conditions of detention in a psychiatric hospital breached Art 3 ECHR; whether an investigation into complaints was adequate for Art 3; whether there was discrimination on the basis of disability in breach of Art 14 with Art 3.

Restanția v Romania (Revision)	451
Issue: Whether findings of a breach of Arts 5(1)(e) and 6 ECHR from detention in a psychiatric hospital and its impact on participation in civil proceedings and an award of €16,300 for non-pecuniary damage should be set aside and the case struck out in light of fresh information that the applicant had died before the judgment was delivered.