under the Convention'. They further found that the common law doctrine of necessity did not provide the requisite safeguards for informal detention of compliant but incapacitated patients to be described as 'in accordance with a procedure described by law' as required under Article 5(1)(e). Response of the UK government to 'the Bournewood judgment' Following the ruling of the ECtHR, the UK government launched a widespread consultation about the potential consequences of 'the Bournewood judgment', as it became known. During this consultation it was considered that compliant but incapacitated adults in care homes, as well as hospitals, might be deprived of their liberty in the meaning of the Convention. This consultation resulted in the amendment of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to contain the 'deprivation of liberty safeguards'. The deprivation of liberty safeguards were intended to plug the 'Bournewood gap' by providing administrative and judicial safeguards for adults who lack mental capacity who are deprived of their liberty in care homes and hospitals. The safeguards came into force in April 2009, but their uptake has not been as widespread as expected and their implementation has been subject to criticism from a wide range of interested parties. See also False imprisonment European Convention on Human Rights HL v UK (2004) Mental Capacity Act 2005 Mental Health Act 1983 Mental Health Act 2007 Notes External links Judgment of the Court of Appeal Judgment of the House of Lords Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights The 'Bournewood' consultation The deprivation of liberty safeguards code of practice The Mental Health Alliance Report on the deprivation of liberty safeguards Short film about the Bournewood judgment by the Equality and Human Rights Commission European Court of Human Rights cases involving the United Kingdom Mental health legal history of the United Kingdom Mental health law in the United Kingdom