By Stephen Moore on 18/10/2007 18:28
Appeal - Merits of decision of the Mental Health Tribunal for ScotlandAn appeal was lodged challenging the validity of a decision of the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland. It is understood to be the first case in Scotland in which a decision of the Tribunal has been directly challenged on its merits. In February 2007 the Tribunal refused an application by the present Appellant to vary a Compulsory Treatment Order in respect of her son, under which he was detained in a Psychiatric hos ...
|
By Euan Dow on 13/05/2007 23:00
Appeal to Sheriff Principal
A Compulsory Treatment Order was first made in relation to the appellant on 15 August 2005 and was extended for six months at the first mandatory review. At a further mandatory review of the Compulsory Treatment Order the Responsible Medical Officer made a determination to extend the CTO for a further period of 12 months without variation. The new expiry date of the CTO was extended to 14 August 2007. The appellant appealed against the decision of the Mental Health Tribunal in terms of section 3 ...
|
By Euan Dow on 26/04/2007 23:00
Appeal to Sheriff Principal
This was an appeal under section 320(2) of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 by the appellants to set aside a decision of the Tribunal of 24 November 2006 whereby the Tribunal made an order in terms of section 264(2) of the 2003 Act declaring that the first respondent was being detained in conditions of excessive security and specified a period of three months from the date of the order during which the duties under section 264(3) to (5) must be performed by the appellan ...
|
By Euan Dow on 30/03/2007 00:00
Appeal under Section 21 of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004
This was an appeal against a decision by the Additional Support Needs Tribunal dated 22 September 2006 refusing a request for a Co-ordinated Support Plan to be prepared by Stirling Council. By that decision the tribunal confirmed the decision of Stirling Council not to make a co-ordinated support plan in respect of KT. The appeal here was brought by Mrs T as K's legal guardian. The tribunal had decided that K did not require significant additional support from another appropriate agency. It was ...
|
By Euan Dow on 27/04/2006 00:00
Proof Before Answer - Summary Application under Th
This was an appeal on behalf of Holmehill Limited, a community body in terms of the Act, against a decision of the Scottish Ministers in connection with the application to register a community interest in the land at Holmehill, Dunblane in the Register of Community Interests in Land. The decision which was the subject of the appeal was contained in a letter with a Notice attached dated 5 April 2005 in which the Scottish Ministers declined to register a provisionally registered community interest ...
|
| 1 |