Consultation for the Law Commission’s 12th Programme of Law Reform

Consultation for the Law Commission’s 12th Programme of Law Reform

The Law Commission is seeking ideas for law reform projects for its new work programme. It is seeking help from practitioners to identify areas of the law that would benefit from reform.

The consultation will decide which areas of law the Commission will review over the next three or four years, and provides an opportunity for organisations and individuals to ask it to examine specific issues that might be causing concern. While you are here have a look at europa casino if you want to play casino games for free or or party bingo if you are looking to play bingo games online for free through party bingo and europ casino websites.

Details of the consultation are available on the Law Commission’s website (www.lawcom.gov.uk), along with the questionnaires that are used to submit project proposals.

The closing date for proposals is 31 October 2013.

Call for Evidence – Mental Capacity Act 2005

The House of Lords Committee appointed to consider and report on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 has now published its call for evidence. The Committee welcomes all views from experts and those with first-hand experience of the Act. The deadline for submissions is 2 September 2013. The full text of the call for evidence can be viewed here.



If you are from UK you might be interested in playing in playing bingo while you are the Awards. Have a look at this foxy bingo or gala bingo websites to play bingo games online for free.

Consultation on proposal to amend the Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008

Consultation on proposal to amend the Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008

The Tribunal Procedure Committee (TPC) is conducting a consultation exercise to seek views on proposed amendments to the Health, Education and Social Care Rules.

The TPC is proposing to amend rule 34 which re-enacts rule 11 of the Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983. This requires that there must be a medical examination of the patient by the medically-qualified member of the tribunal before the case is heard.

The proposal is that the requirement for a medical examination should be relaxed and made discretionary. However, it is proposed that there should normally be medical examinations in cases where a patient is detained for assessment under section 2 of the Mental Health Act 1983 and that there should be a duty placed on hospitals to make medical records available to the First-tier Tribunal in all cases.

The consultation paper details the proposed changes and the rationale. The paper and a response questionnaire (should you wish to use it) can be found on the TPC website at:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/tribunal-procedure-committee/ts-committee-open-consultations

The purpose of the TPC is to make rules governing the practice and procedure in the First–tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal created by the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. If you are from UK you might be interested in playing in playing bingo while you are the Awards. Have a look at this foxy bingo or gala bingo websites to play bingo games online for free.
The Committee is guided by the following principles:
 to make the rules as simple and streamlined as possible;
 to avoid unnecessarily technical language;
 to enable tribunals to continue to operate tried and tested procedures which have been shown to work well; and
 to adopt common rules across tribunals wherever possible, so that rules specific to a chamber or a tribunal are permitted only where there is a clear and demonstrated need for them.

With these principles in mind, we welcome written feedback on the proposed amendments. Please respond by email to tpcsecretariat@justice.gsi.gov.uk, by letter to the above address, or by completing the questionnaire on the website.

The consultation closes on Tuesday 10th September 2013. Whilst the TPC will consider all responses received by the closing date, it would greatly assist the Committee to have responses before then if possible.

We look forward to receiving your comments and hearing your views on the draft rules.

Yours faithfully,

Julie McCallen
Secretary, Tribunal Procedure Committee

New Rates for Experts Fees

New maximum rates for experts came into force on 1 April 2013

The changes apply to work carried out by experts in all civil, family and crime work with a case start date or representation order date of on or after 1 April 2013.

The rate changes are being made under the:

•Civil Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013
•Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013

Maximum rates for experts have been in place since October 2011. But the 2013 Remuneration Regulations will introduce changes to some of the rates from April 2013, including:

•removing the London/non-London rate differentials for many of the expert types
•introducing a new higher rate for surveyors working in housing disrepair matters
The existing rates will continue to apply to cases started after 3 October 2011 but before 1 April 2013.

Please click here for full details. The new rates can be found in SCHEDULE 5.

The main changes affecting Mental Health are that the hourly rate for psychiatrists has been increased in London from £90 to £135 and Psychologists are now at £117. There is no reference to social workers.

Paul Veitch – Good Legal Representation – JMHL Spring 2011

This article was first published in the Spring 2011 issue of the Journal of Mental Health Law: it is reproduced by kind permission of Northumbria Law Press.

The Case for “Good” Legal Representation

Is it worth fighting for?

Paul Veitch

“The key to any successful professional service is recruiting good calibre candidates, good training, continuing education, adequate funding and a strong professional body that is able to enforce standards of conduct”

“If we interfere with the principles which underpin law, fritter them away, pick them out of the crannies of our political and social architecture, restoration is impossible. Our only hope is an order governed by law and consent”

“It gave me the impetus to get better as you have someone on your side

A very recent right

The legal representation of patients detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 (the Act) by way of public funding is very recent. Prior to the Act legal representation was not commonplace and was not seen as desirable. A Royal Commission report in 1957 commented that “As the proceedings on applications to Mental health Review Tribunals will usually be informal and neither the patient nor the hospital or local authority will usually need to be legally represented…” It was the Legal Aid Act 1974 that granted public funding for a solicitor to prepare a case for a Mental health Review Tribunal under the Legal Advice Scheme (the Green Form, remember those uncomplicated days!). This was means-tested but did not grant funding for actual representation. Public funding for representation at the hearing was only granted on 1st December 1982 under ‘Assistance by Way of Representation’. A time span up until today’s date of only 28 years!

The current threat

It cannot be taken for granted, that the right to publicly funded representatives will be preserved in years to come. The Legal Aid scheme enshrining this right is relatively new and vulnerable to arguments that others less qualified could carry out this role.6 This would create savings that the Government is desperate to secure from the Legal Aid budget. While you are here have a look at europe casino if you want to play casino games for free or or party bingo if you are looking to play bingo games online for free through party bingo and europe casino websites. It is also noteworthy that the number of members of the Law Society’s Mental Health Tribunal Panel (the Panel) is falling. From the inception of the Panel in 1986 until 2002 membership increased each year. Membership in 2002 stood at 498; since then the numbers have dropped each year, the figure for Jan 2009 being 395. It is therefore timely to remind ourselves as to why patients detained under the Act having access to good legal representation is a fundamental right. I stress ‘good’ because if it is not good, then the arguments for diluting this right will grow stronger, and second, the legal profession will have failed in their duty to represent the weak and the vulnerable.

To make the case I divide this article into three sections. The first section will explain why we need good legal representatives. The second section will analyse what makes for a good legal representative. The final section will attempt to give some answers as to how we can develop the conditions to ensure that good legal representation remains a permanent feature of the Tribunal system.

Read the remainder of the article (PDF file)

Some people have reported an inability to view this PDF file – if you have difficulties, please email admin@mhla.co.uk: you will be emailed when the issue has been resolved.