The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

Capsticks LLP

1 ST GEORGE'S ROAD, LONDON, SW19 4DR, ENGLAND
Tel:
Work 020 8780 2211
Fax:
Fax 020 8780 1141
DX:
300118 WIMBLEDON CENTRAL
Email:
Web:
www.capsticks.com

Lindsay Gee

Tel:
Work 020 8780 4703
Email:
Capsticks LLP

Position

Lindsay is a consultant and specialises in mental health law, commissioning problems and care homes work.  She is a renowned expert in mental health law, advising our numerous mental health clients on all aspects of this field, and assisting successfully both with Tribunals and with Judicial Reviews.  She has written extensively on mental health issues, and regularly runs training sessions with clients; and contributed to our Mental Health Certificate.

She regularly advises CCGs on a range of commissioning issues and disputes on care packages and individual funding problems.

Lindsay has become an expert also on the Mental Capacity Act, DoLS and Court of Protection proceedings.

She also works regularly with a range of independent healthcare providers and currently has several cases with the Court of Protection and Family Division in respect of care, treatment and accommodation issues, as well as judicial reviews in respect of patients’ detention.

Notable Cases

• Wye Valley NHS Trust v Mr B (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) (2015), which concerned an elderly patient with longstanding psychiatric illness whose lower leg became badly infected but who refused amputation – where the Judge decided that his right to autonomy, a principle treasured by the patient, carried more weight than the medical opinions and enabled him to refuse the surgery even though this was likely to lead to his death.
• L v West London Mental Health NHS Trust and (interested parties) Partnerships in Care and the Secretary of State for Health (2012), re common-law and Article 6 requirements for the lawful transfer of a patient from medium security to high security, where both the patient and the Trust have been granted permission to appeal
• Grogan v Bexley Care Trust and the Secretary of State for Health (2006), re a Health Authority’s eligibility criteria and the Trust’s decision on a patient’s entitlement to NHS-funded continuing care
 K v West London Mental Health Trust (2006), re funding bodies’ powers in respect of transfers proposed by patients’ consultants (in which the lawfulness of taking clinical debates and funding considerations into account was upheld)
• TTM v London Borough of Hackney,  East London NHS Foundation Trust and the Secretary of State for Health (2011), re liability for unlawful detention – in which the detaining Trust was not liable for damages because the error was the AMHP’s and the Trust had acted lawfully and reasonably (and its decision to obtain an outside medical recommendation was endorsed as consistent with s. 12 (2))


London: Private client

Court of protection

Within: Court of protection

Capsticks LLP  has a ‘knowledgeable team that has the clients' best interests in mind when it comes to patient care’. Head of team Francis Lyons  and consultant Lindsay Gee  both have a ‘thorough knowledge of the legislation around capacity and mental health’. The team advises NHS providers and commissioners as well as public, private and charitable sector clients on all issues involving incapacitated and vulnerable adults and children. It is experienced at advising on the interaction between the Mental Health Act, the Mental Capacity Act and the deprivation of liberty safeguards. It advised Enfield CCG in a court of protection case regarding the placement of a 19 year old with brain injury. The brain injury had been acquired in infancy.

[back to top]


Back to index

Legal Developments in London

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • The legal difference between a consultant and an employee according to Nicaraguan Law

    Knowing the legal difference between a consultant and an employee is important for a company that needs to hire someone in Nicaragua or for a person interested in rendering services for a company or another person, due to the fact that the nature of the contractual relationship will determine many factors that both parties must be aware of before executing the contracting modality that will govern the relationship between them - the nature of the contractual relationship impacts on the employment benefits, tax implications and liabilities that the parties must comply with according to the law.  labor_law_in_nicaragua
  • Single director - shareholder Companies according to the Nicaraguan legal system

    What is a Single Shareholder and Director legal entity?
  • Business in Nicaragua- The Most Important Changes in the Recent Tax Reform

    In recent years, the country ́s the government has been committed to improving Taxation in Nicaragua and attempting to follow the legislative model used by some of the other countries in the region. Starting January 1st, 2013, a new tax law (Law No. 822, Tax Concertation Law) came into force in and completely changed the taxation system in Nicaragua. Two years later a new law was issued by the National Assembly containing more than 80 amendments, additions and repeals (Law No 891) which came into force December 18th, 2014.