Surrey Police v. PC (by his litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) & Ors – High Court – [2024] EWHC 1274 (Fam) – Case Summary

Relevant for:

Mental health practitioners, family law practitioners, local government lawyers, police legal advisors

This case concerned an urgent application by Surrey Police to manage the detention of PC, a 26-year-old with mental health issues, in police custody due to the unavailability of a suitable mental health bed.

TLDR:

• Surrey Police made an urgent application regarding PC's detention.
• PC was arrested for criminal damage and had mental health concerns.
• Delays in securing a mental health bed led to prolonged police custody.
• The court emphasized the need for better inter-agency collaboration.
• The Official Solicitor raised concerns about PC's care and legal framework.

On 23 April 2023, PC was arrested for criminal damage. The arresting officers were concerned about his mental health and decided to take him to East Surrey Hospital after delays in ambulance arrival. At the hospital, PC was given lorazepam and assessed by a psychiatric liaison nurse. He was later discharged and taken to a police station, where concerns arose about his discharge circumstances.

The following day, PC's mental health issues persisted. He was seen by the Criminal Justice Liaison and Diversion Service (CJLDS) nurse, and the local authority's Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) service was contacted. However, no Mental Health Act assessment was arranged as PC was deemed unfit for assessment. The police were advised to keep PC in the police station as a place of safety under s 136 MHA 1983. Efforts to find a suitable bed continued, but by evening, no bed was available, and PC's condition worsened.

On 25 April 2023, PC's condition deteriorated further, and he was placed in a body cuff. The police made an urgent out-of-hours application to the court to authorize PC's continued detention in police custody. The court authorized the deprivation of PC's liberty under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court until a suitable bed was found. PC was eventually admitted to a mental health facility on 26 April 2023.

The Official Solicitor raised several concerns, including delays in mental health assessments, the legality of PC's detention, and the administration of lorazepam without proper consent. The court emphasized the need for better inter-agency collaboration and adherence to legal frameworks to avoid similar situations in the future.

Legal representatives: Mr Justin Slater (instructed by Weightmans LLP) for the Applicant, Mr Ian Brownhill (instructed by The Official Solicitor) for the 1st Respondent, Miss Katie Gollop KC (instructed by Hill Dickinson LLP) for the 2nd Respondent, Ms Amanda Scally (instructed by Surrey CC) for the 3rd Respondent

Judicial Panel: Mrs Justice Theis DBE

Case Citation Reference: [2024] EWHC 1274 (Fam)