- Ordinary Residence and Section 117(3)(a) of the Mental Health Act 1983 (Worcestershire County Council v SoS for Health and Social Care)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Local Government analysis: The court found that the answer to the question of which local authority has a duty to provide after-care services, following a second period of detention where the individual had been placed in accommodation in LA B’s area by LA A, pursuant to LA’s A’s duty to provide after-care services, was LA B. In doing so the court confirmed the position set out in the Secretary of State’s existing statutory guidance at paragraph 19.64 was correct—this is that, ‘if the patient, having become ordinarily resident after discharge in local authority area (B) or (C), is subsequently detained in hospital for treatment again, the local authority in whose area the person was ordinarily resident immediately before their subsequent admission (local authority (B) or (C)) will be responsible for their after-care when they are discharged from hospital.’ Written by Peggy Etiebet, barrister at Cornerstone Barristers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial