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.
Paul Bowen (instructed by Cartwright King) for the First Claimant and (instructed by Scott-Moncrieff Harbour & Sinclair) for the Second Claimant Hugh Southey (instructed by Roberts Moore Nicholas Jones) for the Third Claimant David Lock and Nageena Khalique (instructed by Mills & Reeve) for the First Defendant Jonathan Swift and Karen Steyn (instructed by Department of Health) for the Second Defendant Hearing dates : 11, 12, 13, 14 March 2008 ____________________
Section 3 provides for some premises, or areas of premises, not to be smoke-free, despite section 2. It provides, in so far as is material:
The challenge is to the temporary nature of the exemption granted in regulation 10.
(a) For people with neurological or psychiatric conditions, nicotine may enhance cognitive functioning relative to their normal level.
(b) There is considerable evidence that schizophrenia is characterised by specific cognitive deficits which are attenuated, at least acutely, by nicotine.
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.