2026

Cases Reported

R v BGW	1
Issue: The propriety of an extended sentence of 15½ years, 10½ years in custody and 5 years on licence, for a 17-year-old with ADHD, depression and PTSD from abuse in care; the approach to sentencing young people with mental disorders.

R v WHD	9
Issue: Whether a sentence for serious sexual offending against children should be reduced by reason of a recent diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder; the need for a link to offending behaviour.

R v Billy Chamberlain	13
Issue: Whether an immediate custodial sentence for dangerous driving by a man with autism spectrum disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder should be quashed; the importance of following the Sentencing Council Guideline on Sentencing Offenders with Mental Disorders, Developmental Disorders or Neurological Impairments.

R v Andrew Hodgetts	17
Issue: Whether, in relation to a sentence for stalking by a man with traits of autistic spectrum disorder who had an adjustment disorder with depression at the time of the sentence, the judge erred by not following the Sentencing Council Guideline on Sentencing Offenders with Mental Disorders, Developmental Disorders or Neurological Impairments or allowing mitigation for mental health matters; what amounts to a “sufficient connection” between mental disorder and offending behaviour to reduce culpability.

AC v (1) Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust and (2) Secretary of State for Justice	21
Issue: Whether the Tribunal was correct that it had no jurisdiction to hear an application made under s75(2) Mental Health Act 1983 when the patient had been recalled to hospital and his case referred to the Tribunal under s75(1).

R v Craig Welsh (SG’s Reference Under s36 Criminal Justice Act 1988)	25
Issue: Whether, in relation to a man with ADHD, anxiety and depression, a sentence of 6 years’ imprisonment for rape and 1 year consecutive for strangulation, was unduly lenient.

R v James Rees	29
Issue: Whether sufficient account had been taken of the immaturity and mental health difficulties of an offender being sentenced for serious violence committed when he was under 18.

R v Ian Vinnell	32
Issue: Whether a defendant who could not be cross-examined was fit to stand trial, or could be treated as fit if cross-examination was precluded; whether the Court of Appeal, on finding that the defendant had been unfit, could uphold the convictions or should substitute a finding that the defendant committed the acts; the appropriate consequential order for an appellant receiving end-of-life care.

R v Gheorghe Badelita (Conviction)	43
Issue: Whether convictions for assault and threats to kill were safe in light of the judge removing the defendant from court during evidence from the complainants after an aggressive outburst, the context being an acquired brain injury through strokes; the relevance of the Equal Treatment Bench Book; whether the outburst was a matter the jury should be told to take into account.

R v Gheorghe Badelita (Sentence)	54
Issue: The appropriate sentence for assault and threats to kill when an offender with no previous convictions had begun to behave aggressively after having strokes.

In the Petition of MC (FE/LA) for Judicial Review	56
Issue: Whether the failure of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 to allow a patient in low secure conditions to seek a declaration from the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland identifying detention on conditions in excessive security and requiring the identification of an alternative placement, which power existed for those in high or medium secure conditions, breached Art 14 ECHR; whether it was within the ambit of Arts 5 and/or 8.

Eddie Ratcliffe v R	60
Issue: The relevance of immaturity, autism and associated conditions in setting a minimum term for a young person convicted of murder; whether sufficient account had been taken of such factors; the duty to give reasons.

R v Thomas Black	72
Issue: Whether a sentence for serious sexual offending should be reduced by reason of a diagnosis of PTSD arising out of a subsequent incident; the need for evidence on the impact of PTSD.

AM v (1) Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust and (2) Secretary of State for Justice	76
Issue: Whether a Tribunal had applied the correct test in determining that representations from the victim of a conditionally discharged restricted patient should not be disclosed to the patient or the clinical team at a Tribunal hearing at which the patient was seeking to amend an exclusion zone imposed to protect the victim.

JB v (1) Elysium Healthcare and (2) Secretary of State for Justice	81
Issue: Whether a Tribunal decision to uphold detention should be set aside on the basis of a material error of fact.

R (Cygnet Health Care Ltd) v Care Quality Commission	85
Issue: Whether the Care Quality Commission had erred in law in concluding that inspection reports and enforcement decisions made in relation to hospitals operated by a particular provider were not affected by apparent bias arising from the fact that the lead inspector had previously been an in-patient and one of their hospitals and had complained about the standard of care he was offered; the impact of not following a policy that required the assignment of an inspector who had been a patient to be assessed by senior management; whether any of the reports or enforcement decisions should be quashed; the impact of delay; costs.

(1) Sonia Gould and (2) Alice Jeffery v Devon County Council	102
Issue: Whether a decision to close a drop-in service for adults with mental health difficulties that had operated since 1992 was unlawful for failing to have regard to various statutory duties and policies, and/or whether it was rational.

R v Noel David Quigley	122
Issue: Whether a sentence of 3 years’ imprisonment, half in custody and half on licence, for assaulting a police officer with a knife, was manifestly excessive or wrong in law; whether the sentence should have been suspended in light of mental health matters and efforts at rehabilitation; the approach to deterrence and culpability for defendants with mental health conditions.

R v Barry Donnelly	130
Issue: Guidelines on sentencing for manslaughter by diminished responsibility, including how to assess the level of responsibility retained by the defendant.

MB v Spain	137
Issue: Whether a complaint about pre-trial detention was admissible in light of domestic remedies; whether a complaint about a security measure imposed on a finding that a person was not criminally responsible was admissible in light of additional domestic remedies to the appeal taken; whether detention was in compliance with Art 5(1)(e) ECHR when the court imposing the security measure focussed on the mental state of the person at the time of the incident not the time of the order; the steps required for compliance with Art 5(1)(e).

Mark Dobson (by his litigation friend, Anne Dobson) v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police	151
Issue: Whether there was a duty of care to arrange a full mental health assessment of or use powers under s136 Mental Health Act 1983 in relation to a man who arrested after a report he was planning to self-harm with insulin and who overdosed with insulin after release; whether there was any breach of duty and/or causation, and whether Art 2 ECHR was engaged.

R v Patrick Sharp-Meade	167
Issue: Whether the minimum term for a young offender with various mental health conditions and developmental delay convicted of murder rather than manslaughter on the basis of diminished responsibility was too high in light of his immaturity and life-long mental disorder.