A PARANOID schizophrenic who stabbed her mother to death has lost a Court of Appeal bid for more than £300,000 damages.

Ecila Henderson chased 69-year-old retired teacher Rosemary Armstrong from her flat in Pokesdown after a visit in August 2010 and stabbed her 22 times.

She was charged with murder but her plea of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility was accepted at Winchester Crown Court and she remains detained in a mental health unit.

Henderson, 46, had been diagnosed long before and had a history of hospital admissions but, in June 2008, was allowed to live in the community and moved into supported accommodation.

At the time of the killing she was under the care of the Southbourne Community Mental Health Team, within Dorset Healthcare University Foundation Trust, and an inquiry later made critical findings about the trust's conduct.

The core criticism was of a failure to act in a timely manner when alerted by a health worker to a significant deterioration in Henderson's condition.

She sued the trust, which admitted liability for negligence, for damages for the psychiatric harm she suffered because of the killing and her loss of liberty.

Her lawyers previously told the High Court she had an acute sense of loss and grief which went beyond the feelings stemming from an ordinary and natural bereavement and had been unable to address her grief over her mother's death.

But her claim, which included compensation for depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, her loss of liberty and of a share in her late mother's estate, was rejected in December 2016.

Mr Justice Jay ruled that Henderson's claim was barred by the rule of law which prohibits a person from recovering damages for the consequences of their own illegality.

Through the Official Solicitor, she challenged that ruling at the Court of Appeal, but it was unanimously upheld by three leading judges.

Announcing the court's ruling on Friday, Sir Terence Etherton said: "The Court of Appeal holds that Ms Henderson cannot claim for any of the heads of damage which are all barred by the doctrine of illegality."

Setting out one of the legal principles on which the court based its ruling, the judge said it is "offensive to public notions of the fair distribution of resources" if someone is compensated where the immediate cause of the damage was their own criminal act.

Henderson's lawyers were given until October 2 to decide whether to apply to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal over the ruling.