Today the Court of Appeal dismissed the local authority’s appeal in the case of Manchester City Council v Tinsley. The court unanimously held that a person who has been compulsorily detained in a hospital for mental disorder under section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (“the 1983 Act”) and has then been released from detention but still requires residential “after-care services” under section 117 of the 1983 Act is entitled to require his local authority to provide such services at any time before he has exhausted sums reflecting the costs of care awarded to him in a judgment in his favour against a negligent tortfeasor. In doing so the court dismissed the local authority’s arguments based on the principle of ‘double recovery’ by reference to the decision in Peters v East Midlands Strategic Health Authority  QB 48. This case will be of significant interest to local authorities, clinical commissioning groups, clinical negligence practitioners and deputies appointed by the Court of Protection.
Jenni Richards QC and Adam Fullwood were instructed, by Hugh Jones Solicitors, as Deputy for Property & Affairs for Mr Tinsley.
To read the full judgment click here.
Please do not hesitate to contact chambers in relation to any of the issues arising from this judgment.