QB-2022-002447 - [2025] EWHC 2803 (KB)
Fecha: 29-Oct-2025
THE CLAIM
THE CLAIM
This is an application by the First Defendant Harrow Council, referred to here as “D1”, to strike out a claim brought against them and others in respect of allegations made at common law and under the Human Rights Act (“HRA”) in respect of a mental health assessment on the Third Claimants by a Mental Health Professional (an “AMHP”) for whom D1 is said by the Claimants to be responsible.
The claim is made following a serious physical attack upon his mother, the First Claimant, by the Third Claimant on 23 December 2018(they are referred to here as C1 and C3 respectively) and the psychiatric injury suffered by the Second Claimant (C2), the sister of C3, who came upon the aftermath of the attack.
The allegations of breach against D1 concern an assessment for detention undertaken pursuant to the Mental Health Act 1983 (referred to here as “the MHA” or “the Act”) on 14 August 2018 co-ordinated by an AMHP. She and two medical practitioners saw C3 in police custody, and assessed him as not to be sectioned under the MHA. He remained in police custody and was then released.
The claim was issued on 28 July 2022 with Particulars of Claim dated 16 December 2022. In its Defence in June 2023 a number of formal and other concerns were raised by D1, and thereafter the claim was amended, following a CMC on 8 February 2024.
A detailed chronology of events is given by the Claimants. No issue is taken with it by D1 at this stage, the points made in this application raise issues of law. The court will take the alleged facts at their highest for the purpose of testing the legal submissions in this application.
- Heading
- THE CLAIM
- As against all Claimants
- As against C2
- As against C3
- As against C2 and C3
- FACTUAL BACKGROUND
- Events of 14 August 2018
- The index incident
- The Common Law Claim
- The Human Rights Case
- As against C2
- As against C3
- D1’s position on the Common law duty in its defence
- D1’s position on the Human Rights Case
- Framework for the Application
- The Relevant Statutory Provisions
- Section 139 Discussion
- Duty of Care Discussion
- Consistency with statutory framework
- The omissions principle and its exceptions – an assumption of responsibility – services or control?
- He continued
- Conclusions