19.124R (Afework) v Camden LBC [2013] EWHC 1637 (Admin)
Accommodation need only be provided as an after-care service when the patient is required to occupy specialised accommodation to meet needs arising out of the condition that led to his or her detention
Facts: an issue arose as to whether Mr Afework was entitled to accommodation under section 117(2) of the MHA 1983 (for which no charge could be made) and, later on, whether he was entitled to accommodation under section 117(2) or section 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948.
Judgment: Mostyn J held that Mr Afework has never been entitled to accommodation under section 117(2) of the MHA 1983 because initially he had been able to function independently in his own accommodation, albeit with social work support and then subsequently, when he required specialist accommodation, that was not because a supervening brain injury, not for the reasons that had led to his earlier detention under the Mental Health Act 1983. Mostyn J reviewed the authorities and concluded as follows:
19. I therefore hold that as a matter of law section 117(2) is only engaged vis-à-vis accommodation if:
i) The need for accommodation is a direct result of the reason that the ex-patient was detained in the first place (‘the original condition’);ii) The requirement is for enhanced specialised accommodation to meet needs directly arising from the original condition; andiii) The ex-patient is being placed in the accommodation on an involuntary (in the sense of being incapacitated) basis arising as a result of the original condition.
Comment: this seems very restrictive.