RM v Scottish Ministers [2012] UKSC 58 (Lord Hope, Lady Hale, Lords Wilson, Reed, Carnwath JSC): the failure of Scottish Ministers to make regulations to bring into operation the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Scotland Act 2003, sections 268 to 271 (which allow certain qualifying patients to apply to a tribunal if they consider they are being held in conditions of “excessive security”), had thwarted the intention of the Scottish Parliament and was unlawful. Click here for the judgment.
R (Hayle) v Camden LBC (26/11/12, Sales J): it had been lawful to refuse to provide accommodation and care services on an emergency basis pending a full community care assessment, as there had been a lawful assessment that the applicant was not in urgent need. The judgment was extempore and is not yet available as a transcript.
Catholic Child Welfare Society & Ors v Various Claimants [2012] UKSC 56 (Lord Phillips, Lady Hale, Lords Kerr, Wilson, Carnwath JSC): the Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools, a religious order, was vicariously liable for sexual abuse perpetrated by brother teachers at a residential school for boys, even though the Institute had not managed that school. Click here for the judgment.
R (Toufighy and Duran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 3004 Admin (Beatson J): D, a Somali male, was not remotely at risk of suffering inhuman and degrading treatment if sent to Hungary under Dublin II nor would that breach his rights under Article 8 ECHR as he was not in a relationship nor could he establish that he was only capable of having a relationship with another Somali unable to enter Hungary. As to T, whilst living conditions and educational opportunities were better in England than in Hungary, it was proportionate notwithstanding her children’s best interests for her and they to be removed to Hungary under Dublin II because they were being removed as a family unit and whilst they had been in the UK for 3 years, their situation had been highly precarious during that time as the decision had been made to remove them after just 5 months. Click here for the judgment.
R (Mohammed Mohsan Ali) v Newham LBC [2012] EWHC 2970 Admin (Kenneth Parker J): the local authority was required to follow the national guidance on the use of tactile paving, for the benefit of visually impaired people, produced by the Department of Transport, unless it had good reasons to depart from it, for example because there were special circumstances locally justifying departure. However, the authority’s reasons for departing from the national guidance were not good ones. The importance of the national guidance derived from its production by a number of agencies with considerable expertise in this area, its imperative terms and the fact that it was issued against the background of the general equality duty. Click here for the judgment.
