Hi, does anyone remember a case where the Tribunal doctor (following a PHE) expressed a firm view of no-discharge prior to the Tribunal taking place. I recall that there was a successful challenge that confirmed that whilst a preliminary view may be made, the statement of fact was an error in law. I’d love the case references if anyone knows?
There’s this:
Bernard v SW London and St George’s MH NHS Trust [2013] UKUT 58 (AAC), [2013] MHLO 26 - Mental Health Law Online
1 Like
I was going to add the Bernard v SW London and St George’s MH NHS Trust 2013 Upper Tribunal decision. For the whole tribunal you have RN v Curo Care [2011] UKUT 263 too.
1 Like
I can’t think of any successful challenges, though it was a bit surprising that the patient in Bernard lost (as the medical member had stated “I have no issues with the nature; it is chronic, relapsing, etcetera”).
Anyway, there are a couple of older cases. In R (S) v MHRT [2002] EWHC 2522 (Admin) the patient didn’t want a PHE at all. The judge concluded that “[i]f an otherwise impartial and independent member of a tribunal has a preconceived concluded opinion, or if he expresses himself in such a way as to give rise to reasonable apprehension that he has a preconceived concluded opinion, he lacks the necessary impartiality, but not otherwise.” That was cited in R (RD) v MHRT [2007] EWHC 781 (Admin), where the judge decided that communication by the medical member of a “very preliminary” view was lawful, even though it went to detainability and not merely to mental condition.