M-L v Jewell & Home Counties Dairies [2002] EWHC 417 (QB) (15 March 2002)

M-L v Jewell & Home Counties Dairies [2002] EWHC 417 (QB) (15 March 2002)

The claimant was not a patient within the meaning of the Mental Health Act 1983 at the relevant times after the initial recovery period post-accident; he regained capacity to manage and administer his property and affairs, as evidenced by his conduct, management of finances, and ability to seek and act on advice. The settlement in 1987 is not void for lack of court approval, and limitation applies to the claim against Brutton & Co.

Citation
[2002] EWHC 417 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: M. M-L; Defendants: Jewell & Home Counties Dairies; Defendants: Brutton & Co.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury and Professional Negligence / Preliminary Issue Trial on Capacity (patient Status)
Outcome
Claimant found not to have been a patient at the relevant times; preliminary issue determined against the claimant.
Legal Topics
Capacity to Manage Affairs, Patient Status Under Mental Health Act 1983, Limitation Act 1980, Court Approval of Settlements, Functional Test for Capacity
Mental Health Law Personal Injury Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Capacity to Manage Affairs Patient Status Under Mental Health Act 1983 Limitation Act 1980 Court Approval of Settlements +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. M-L

Claimant

Jewell & Home Counties Dairies

Defendants

Brutton & Co.

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury and Professional Negligence / Preliminary Issue Trial on Capacity (patient Status)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant has been a patient within the meaning of RSC Order 80 and/or Part 21 of the CPR at any time since 8th September 1980
  2. 2 If so, what are the period or periods when the claimant has been a patient between 8th September 1980 to date

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was not a patient within the meaning of the Mental Health Act 1983 at the relevant times after the initial recovery period post-accident; he regained capacity to manage and administer his property and affairs, as evidenced by his conduct, management of finances, and ability to seek and act on advice. The settlement in 1987 is not void for lack of court approval, and limitation applies to the claim against Brutton & Co.

Court Disposition

Claimant found not to have been a patient at the relevant times; preliminary issue determined against the claimant.

Orders

  • Claimant's application for declaration of patient status dismissed.
  • No order for reopening the 1987 settlement.