Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-p566r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T17:20:46.701Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Protection of Medical Men by the English Lunacy Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2018

Extract

In the preceding part of this paper we considered what may be called the substantive provisions of section 330 of the Lunacy Act, 1890. We now pass on to the adjective part of the section. Suppose that a medical man, against whom an action for damages for the alleged false imprisonment of an alleged lunatic has been raised, is in a position to satisfy the Court or a Judge that “there is no reasonable ground” for imputing to him “want of good faith or reasonable care,” when and how shall he avail himself of his statutory privilege? Upon these important points section 330 displays the vagueness that is almost a characteristic of modern legislation. The only information that it gives us is that an application to stay proceedings may be made “summarily” (a term of which no definition is offered or even suggested) to “the High Court,” and that “the Court or a Judge” may grant or refuse the application “upon such terms as to costs or otherwise” as the said Court or Judge may think fit. Now, in the absence both of any clear light from the section itself and of any authoritative judicial interpretation of it, the maxim Omnis definitio in jure periculosa est applies with peculiar force, and consequently the following observations are offered with some hesitation.

Type
Part 1.—Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1892 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Error was an old form of appeal.Google Scholar

This appears from the reports of the Cases under consideration; and see Metropolitan Bank v. Pooley, 1885, 10 Appeal Cases, per Lord Blackburn, at p. 221.Google Scholar

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.