Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES LADY JUSTICE HALLETT and LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL ____________________
Richard Gordon QC and Susanna Rickard (instructed by Richard Charlton Solicitors) for the Appellant Fenella Morris QC (instructed by Capsticks LLP) for the 1st Respondent Vikram Sachdeva QC (instructed by Bevan Brittan) for the 2nd Respondent Hearing dates: 12 & 13 December 2016 ____________________
The report recommended admission of the claimant to Broadmoor as he could be more safely managed in the environment of a high security setting. It was recognised in the report that his specialist needs relating to his sexual identity issues and related risks to him and others might be more assertively and safely managed in the high security setting. On 7 November 2013 the Broadmoor admissions panel agreed to his admission, subject to a meeting between professionals. That meeting duly took place. It was agreed that it would be helpful to have the opinion of the gender identity clinic.
The decision to admit to Broadmoor and the decision of the Broadmoor Appeal Panel
He also provided a report dated 15 April 2015 in answer to specific questions from Richard Charlton Solicitors.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.