December 2025 update

Updates MHLO monthly updates
1

Website

  • Magic Book. The Magic Book is a database of contact details. The main idea is to add the hospitals and other places you visit (not just your own place of work). To create/edit contacts, there is no need to log in and the process is very quick and simple. See Magic Book

  • Mental Health Law Online CPD scheme: 12 points for £75. Obtain 12 CPD points online by answering monthly questionnaires. The scheme is an ideal way to obtain your necessary hours, or to evidence your continued competence. It also helps to support the continued development of this website, and your subscriptions (and re-subscriptions) are appreciated. For full details and to subscribe, see CPD scheme.

  • Cases. By the end of this month, Mental Health Law Online contained 2526 categorised cases

  • Chronology. See December 2025 chronology for this month’s changes to the website in date order.

Cases

  • Case (Change of status - conditional discharge recall). Cameron v SSJ [2025] EWCA Civ 1574 — The tribunal loses jurisdiction in relation to an application made by a conditionally discharged patient when he is recalled. Effective judicial oversight is provided by the recall reference. This reference must be made “within days… normally within a few days” of recall and the duty can be enforced by judicial review (Rayner). What if the patient is discharged again before the reference is made? The Court of Appeal says it is striking that the duty to refer following recall is “mandatory and unqualified”, so presumably the reference should still be made. What if the patient is conditionally discharged before the reference hearing? An application survives conditional discharge (DD) and the Court of Appeal seems to apply this to references.

  • Case (Procedural unfairness). Re R (A Child) [2025] EWCA Civ 1504 — (1) The parents had not had the opportunity to engage meaningfully in the proceedings either before or at the hearing (at which the High Court declared that their daughter had died) given the lateness of the evidence and their lack of representation. (2) It was not necessary to have joined the daughter as a party as there was no best interests decision involved.

  • Case (Diagnosing death). Barts Health NHS Trust v MC [2025] EWHC 3140 (Fam) — The patient’s heartbeat was being preserved mechanically, which under her parents’ interpretation of Islam meant their daughter was alive, despite brain stem death. The court declared that death had occurred.

  • Case (Brain stem testing abroad). A London NHS Trust v DT [2025] EWCOP 36 (T3) — “Following tests and observations the clinical team looking after DT in London believe she is brain stem dead. The clinical team consider it necessary to establish diagnosis and confirmation of death by brain stem testing performed according to the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges 2025 Code of Practice for the Diagnosis and Confirmation of Death (‘the 2025 Code’). DT’s family are profoundly and deeply shocked by everything that has happened. They do not agree to the brain stem tests being undertaken here, they wish to fly DT to a hospital in Country W that can undertake such tests and withdraw treatment.”

  • Case (Cancer treatment). Powys Teaching Health Board v NT [2025] EWCOP 44 (T3) — “The court is concerned with an application to operate on NT to explore and remove what is thought to be a potentially life-threatening tumour from his bladder through a procedure known as transurethral resection of a bladder tumour (‘TURBT’).”

  • Case (Treatment during s17 leave). Re RM (Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)) [2024] UKSC 7 — “These appeals concern the proper meaning and operation of provisions governing the discharge from hospital of a mentally disordered patient who is compulsorily detained in a hospital for medical treatment, and their inter-relationship with provisions governing the use of leave of absence from hospital as a means of transitioning from secure conditions to discharge, contained in the Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 … I do not regard the “significant component” test as necessary, or indeed helpful, when deciding whether a patient’s ongoing treatment is treatment in a hospital. The test has no statutory basis and is a gloss on the statutory words. I agree with the submission on behalf of RM that it risks unnecessary treatment being devised in an effort to ensure that the test is met and is arbitrary and subject to happenstance. For these reasons, it should no longer be followed. As explained, even when on authorised article 15 leave, the patient has a hospital at which he or she is detained when not on leave, and article 15 (with the liability to recall in article 15(5)) itself provides a sufficient connection to a hospital for a patient who is liable to be detained.”

Legislation

  • Legislation. Mental Health Act 2025 — This Act which amends the MHA 1983 received Royal Assent on 18 December 2025. A few sections come into force on the same day: s53 (Power of Secretary of State to make consequential provision), s55 (Extent), s56 (Commencement), and s57 (Short title). Some provisions will come into force on 18 February 2026: s30(2) (Periods for tribunal applications - DOL C/D patients), s32 (References: restricted patients subject to deprivation of liberty conditions), s35 (Conditional discharge subject to deprivation of liberty conditions), s36(1) and (3)(b) (Transfers of prisoners and others to hospital: conditions - s48 transfer grounds), s38 (Transfer directions for persons detained in youth detention accommodation), and s39 (Minor amendment - fixing a typo). The remainder will come into force on dates to be set out in regulations.

Resources

Events