Michelle Flint

Experience

• I act on behalf of the secure estate and private prison sector and have been part of BLM's specialist prison law team for more than 12 years.
• I specialise in representing clients at inquests, the majority of which involve Article 2 ECHR issues where death has occurred in prison or arising out of police custody.
• My expertise also includes representing the secure estate  in civil claims pursued as a result of the death and in any Judicial Review submitted during the inquest proceedings or flowing from the inquest conclusion. I have dealt with a number of high profile deaths in custody involving a wide variety of issues ranging from the adequacy of suicide and self-harm policies; to the manslaughter of a cell mate. I have expertise ranging from evaluating the adequacy of risk assessments performed on prisoners; to the provision of healthcare facilities.
• My work also includes defending employer’s liability and public liability claims arising across the prison estate where I handle claims for assault, false imprisonment, misfeasance in the public office and breaches of human rights and negligence. I also have experience in dealing with group

Significant cases

Inquests

• GM (deceased) - jury inquest into the death of a 15 year old boy who suffered positional asphyxia whilst being physically restrained in a Youth Training Centre.
• MO (deceased) - jury inquest into death of Turkish immigrant who died after being held at the immigration detention centre in Dover.
• MT (deceased) - jury inquest, death in custody. Scope included adequacy of suicide watch, mental health assessments and procedure for checking the cells during evening roll count.
• RB (deceased) - jury inquest, death in custody. Manslaughter of cell mate. Scope included assessments of prisoners when cell sharing.
• DL (deceased) - jury inquest, death of a recovering heroin addict addressing prescribing medication in prison and signs of intoxication.

High Court

• Group litigation involving 500 claimants who alleged systemic failures to deliver appropriate medical care to those prisoners with drug problems in prison. It was alleged that they were subjected to rapid enforced detoxification from their drug addiction and that the practice of forced detoxification amounted to negligent medical care, an assault and a breach of Human Rights Act 1998.
• W v defendant - successfully defended a claim alleged caused an inmate to suffer psychiatric injury resulting in severe self-harm, when placed on a unit with sex offenders.
• E v defendant - two claims brought on behalf of the claimant arising out of her detention in prison. The first claim concerned an alleged incident when the claimant in her capacity as a listener was attacked and held hostage. The second claim related to alleged sexual abuse by two prison officers separately.