# CTO Renewal Invalid?

**URL:** <https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/cto-renewal-invalid/863>\
**Category:** Mental Health Act\
**Tags:** cto\
**Created:** [10 April 2022 13:24 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/cto-renewal-invalid/863 "2022-04-10T13:24:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![JoeRobinson](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/ccd318/32.png) [@JoeRobinson](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/u/JoeRobinson)\
**Post date:** [10 April 2022 13:24 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/cto-renewal-invalid/863/1 "2022-04-10T13:24:39Z")

</div>

I understand that a CTO renewal requires the patient to be examined within the 2 month period preceding the date for renewal. What happens if the patient was examined 2 months and 2 weeks before, and the papers show this as the date of examination but the the bottom bit is signed by the RC in the 2 month period? Does this invalidate the cto?

My second question is then, where does this leave the patient if the CTO has since been revoked? The revocation occurred before the renewal would have kicked in.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Nickwoo](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/ccd318/32.png) [@Nickwoo](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/u/Nickwoo)\
**Post date:** [11 April 2022 08:04 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/cto-renewal-invalid/863/2 "2022-04-11T08:04:24Z")

</div>

Hmm. The revocation and any period of detention up to the renewal date is probably fine. But I don’t think the renewal actually happened, because it is the date of the examination which is key. It is likely that this person has not actually been subject to the Act since the date the section should have been renewed. Have alook at [Bostridge v Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust [2014] MHLO 42 (CC) - Mental Health Law Online](https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Bostridge_v_Oxleas_NHS_Foundation_Trust_(2014)_MHLO_42_(CC))

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Nickwoo](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/ccd318/32.png) [@Nickwoo](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/u/Nickwoo)\
**Post date:** [11 April 2022 08:14 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/cto-renewal-invalid/863/3 "2022-04-11T08:14:23Z")

</div>

Or…the Rereference Guide says about revocation: “26.60 The Act then applies to them as it would if they had never been on CTO. The only differences are that, for the purposes of expiry and renewal of the authority to detain, patients are treated as if they had first been detained on the day the CTO is revoked” So the RC and the hospital managers may have accidentally sorted themselves out. But they’ll need to calculate a new renewal time.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jonathan](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/user_avatar/forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/jonathan/32/88_2.png) [@Jonathan](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/u/Jonathan)\
**Post date:** [11 April 2022 17:44 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/cto-renewal-invalid/863/4 "2022-04-11T17:44:21Z")

</div>

> [@JoeRobinson](#):
>
> What happens if the patient was examined 2 months and 2 weeks before, and the papers show this as the date of examination but the the bottom bit is signed by the RC in the 2 month period? Does this invalidate the cto?

It just means that the CTO would not be lawfully extended beyond the original period (see [s20A](https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/MHA_1983_s20A)(4)(a)).

> [@JoeRobinson](#):
>
> The revocation occurred before the renewal would have kicked in.

> [@Nickwoo](#):
>
> So the RC and the hospital managers may have accidentally sorted themselves out.

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head here.