RM v The Scottish Ministers [2008] ScotCS CSOH_123 (27 August 2008)
Section 268 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 does not impose a legal duty on the Scottish Ministers to make and lay regulations specifying qualifying patients and hospitals by any particular date. The section permits, but does not require, the Ministers to make such regulations at their discretion. There is no unlawfulness in the respondents' failure to make the regulations by 1 May 2006 or thereafter.
- Citation
- [2008] ScotCS CSOH_123
- Parties
- Petitioner: RM; Respondents: The Scottish Ministers
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 27 August 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Petition / Final Judgment at First Instance
- Outcome
- petition refused
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Interpretation, Regulations Under Mental Health (care and Treatment) (scotland) Act 2003, Ministerial Duties, Rights of Appeal for Detained Patients
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
RM
Petitioner
The Scottish Ministers
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Petition / Final Judgment at First Instance
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Scottish Ministers are under a legal duty to make and lay before Parliament regulations under section 268 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 by a specified date to enable appeals by non-state hospital patients against conditions of excessive security.
- 2 Whether the failure to make such regulations by 1 May 2006 is unlawful.
Ratio Decidendi
Section 268 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 does not impose a legal duty on the Scottish Ministers to make and lay regulations specifying qualifying patients and hospitals by any particular date. The section permits, but does not require, the Ministers to make such regulations at their discretion. There is no unlawfulness in the respondents' failure to make the regulations by 1 May 2006 or thereafter.
Court Disposition
petition refused
Orders
- Respondents' second plea-in-law sustained.
- Petitioner's plea-in-law repelled.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment