# Enforceability of new deprivation of liberty conditional discharge **URL:** \ **Category:** Mental Health Act\ **Tags:** conditional-discharge\ **Created:** [26 March 2026 10:14 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/enforceability-of-new-deprivation-of-liberty-conditional-discharge/5382 "2026-03-26T10:14:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 13
**Author:** ![Jonathan](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/user_avatar/forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/jonathan/32/88_2.png) [@Jonathan](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/u/Jonathan)\ **Post date:** [11 May 2026 13:50 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/enforceability-of-new-deprivation-of-liberty-conditional-discharge/5382/13 "2026-05-11T13:50:43Z")
> [@AlexRK](#): > > Exactly, and the statute therefore does precisely that which Lady Hale said needed to be done, namely providing explicitly for deprivation of liberty outside hospital. So far we have: 1. Your point above about the statute being amended specifically to authorise deprivation of liberty outside hospital. 2. The lack of any specific power (like s17(3)) being because we leave the definition of “DOL” (and therefore what exactly is authorised) to the ECtHR. 3. The Wessely review expected a DOL condition to be enforceable (on the spot rather than just by recall). 4. Parliament’s intention was to remove the _MM_ gap and “stop the difference in treatment” between those with and without the relevant capacity. 5. The MOJ and MHT are wrongly applying the old approach (where normal conditions can only really be enforced by recall or its threat) to a completely different scenario. 6. In any event, if recall is happening, holding pending recall would for be a negligible length of time and so not engage Article 5. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/enforceability-of-new-deprivation-of-liberty-conditional-discharge/5382)._