Deprivation of liberty for the public sector

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

In England and Wales, the non-consensual care and treatment of people with a mental disorder is governed largely by two parallel legal schemes—the Mental Health Act 1983 (MeHA 1983) and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). There is considerable overlap between the two Acts and the relationship can be extremely complex.

While MeHA 1983 has no age limit, MCA 2005 applies only to those aged 16 and over. The interface, therefore, only arises in relation to people aged 16 and over.

In very broad terms, MeHA 1983 provides mainly for the detention and treatment of people in hospital for mental disorder, on the basis of protection of the person and of the public. A person can be admitted and treated irrespective of their capacity to consent.

MCA 2005 applies only to those who lack the relevant decision-making capacity. It is not limited to hospital settings or treatment for mental disorder; it covers (nearly) all decisions and provides for deprivation of liberty based on the person’s best interests.

Article 5 (right to liberty and security)

Article 5 of the European

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Local Government News

Ofsted updates multi-agency information sharing agreement

Ofsted has announced updates to its information sharing agreement with other inspectorates. The revised agreement includes clarity improvements and additional signatories. The agreement covers information sharing between Ofsted, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services , HM Inspectorate of Probation and HM Inspectorate of Prisons.

Key planning provisions in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill

Planning analysis: The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill was introduced to the House of Commons on 10 July 2025 and is awaiting a second reading. The Bill gives legislative effect to the government’s ambitions to reintroduce strategic planning across England and create a consistent framework for devolved powers. This analysis looks at the key planning provisions of the Bill, alongside the background to its introduction and the potential implications for the planning and development sector.

Post adoption contact—where are we now? (Re S (Placement Order Contact))

Family analysis: The Court of Appeal judgment in Re S (Placement Order Contact) carefully considers the court’s approach to contact between siblings at the placement for adoption stage. There has been a shift in recent years with a great deal of research as to the potential advantages to adopted children of maintaining some sort of direct contact with their birth family. That being said, on the ground it remains unusual for orders to be made under section 26 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 (ACA 2002) for direct contact, with proposals in final care plans often being for indirect or letterbox contact. The Court of Appeal makes clear that in each case where placement orders are made, there needs to be a bespoke analysis of the future contact arrangements, in order to meet the complex and life-long needs of children who are to be placed for adoption. Written by Gemma Adams, associate solicitor at Dawson Cornwell LLP.

High Court refuses permission to review Government’s export decision on combat aircraft components—R (Al-Haq v Secretary of State for Business)

Public Law analysis: Judicial review—the High Court refused permission to bring judicial review proceedings in respect of the government’s decision to exclude licences for the export of components for F-35 combat aircraft which could not be identified as destined for Israel (the F-35 exclusion). On 2 September 2024, the defendant, the Secretary of State for Business and Trade (the SSBT), decided to suspend licences authorising the export of items that might be used in carrying out or facilitating Israeli military operations in the conflict in Gaza. The SSBT did so explicitly because the government had formed the view that Israel was not committed to compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict in Gaza and that there was therefore a clear risk that such items might be used in that conflict to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law. The claimant, supported by the interveners, challenged the lawfulness of the F-35 exclusion, which was referred to in the judgment as the ‘F-35 Carve Out’. Written by Rowena Wisniewska Sethi, barrister at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square Chambers.

View Local Government by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

Late payment penalties—inheritance tax

Late payment penalties—inheritance taxWhile interest often accrues on overdue tax, the late payment of certain taxes may also attract a penalty. For information on the interest accruing on overdue tax, see Practice Notes: IHT—payment deadlines on death—Interest on IHT and Interest on late paid

Contributory negligence in personal injury claims

Contributory negligence in personal injury claimsContributory negligence is a partial defence which can lead to a discount in damages.Other defences may also be relevant. See Practice Notes: Did the claimant consent to the risk of injury? and Was the claimant involved in an illegal activity?If a

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements[Insert addressee details]Dear [insert name][It is our understanding that [insert name of prospective employee] [was an employee of yours between the dates of [insert dates as appropriate] OR is a current employee of
Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

Late payment penalties—inheritance tax

Late payment penalties—inheritance tax

Late payment penalties—inheritance taxWhile interest often accrues on overdue tax, the late payment of certain taxes may also attract a penalty. For information on the interest accruing on overdue tax, see Practice Notes: IHT—payment deadlines on death—Interest on IHT and Interest on late paid

Contributory negligence in personal injury claims

Contributory negligence in personal injury claims

Contributory negligence in personal injury claimsContributory negligence is a partial defence which can lead to a discount in damages.Other defences may also be relevant. See Practice Notes: Did the claimant consent to the risk of injury? and Was the claimant involved in an illegal activity?If a

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements[Insert addressee details]Dear [insert name][It is our understanding that [insert name of prospective employee] [was an employee of yours between the dates of [insert dates as appropriate] OR is a current employee of