JMcG v Devon Partnership NHS Trust: [2017] UKUT 348 (AAC) ; [2018] AACR 11

Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Knowles on 23 August 2017.

From:
HM Courts & Tribunals Service and Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)
Published
7 September 2017
Last updated
11 December 2018 — See all updates
Categories:
Mental health
Judges:
Knowles, G
Decision date:
23 August 2017

Read the full decision in [2018] AACR 11ws

Judicial Summary

Reported as [2018] AACR 11

Mental Health – detention under Mental Health Act – section 72(3) – whether tribunal had power to defer the discharge of a detained patient beyond the date of the order authorising detention

The appellant, a prisoner, was transferred to hospital for treatment after he became psychotic and paranoid. His condition eventually improved after he was transferred to a hospital closer to his home and had received anti-psychotic medication. On 9 December 2016, he applied to the First-tier Tribunal (F-tT) for discharge from detention. The appellant recognised that immediate discharge would be inappropriate and the tribunal was invited to defer discharge to allow the care team sufficient time in which to arrange for appropriate accommodation. The F-tT refused the application having found that such deferment would be for a short period as the appellant’s section was due to expire in early February 2017. The appellant appealed to the Upper Tribunal (UT) on the basis that the F-tT had erred in its belief that, pursuant to section 72(3) Mental Health Act 1983, it could not defer the discharge of a detained patient beyond the date of the order authorising detention and had failed to give adequate reasons for its decision overall.

Held, allowing the appeal, that:

  1. a tribunal when exercising its power pursuant to section 72(3) to direct a discharge on a future specified date, cannot specify a future date for discharge after that on which the authority for the patient’s detention expires (paragraph 32);

  2. once the tribunal had made a direction pursuant to section 72(3) liability to be detained, either pursuant to sections 2 or 3 or indeed to a Community Treatment Order, came to an end on the date specified for discharge. A date set beyond the date of the order authorising detention would be as invalid as the continuation of the Community Treatment Order in MP v Mersey Care NHS Trust [2011] UKUT 107 (AAC) since the necessary underpinning of the order authorising detention would be lacking (paragraph 34);

  3. there was no basis to intervene with the F-tT’s decision as it had carried out its fact-finding role rationally and its written reasons accorded with the UT’s guidance in MS v North East London Foundation Trust [2013] UKUT 92 (AAC) - the F-tT had (a) stated what facts it had found; (b) explained how and why it made them; and (c) showed how it applied the law to those facts (paragraphs 41 to 46).

Published 7 September 2017
Last updated 11 December 2018 + show all updates

  1. Reported as AACR 11

  2. First published.