Tribunals (and Managers?) - The Duty to Give Adequate Reasons

Originaly published July 2004

The Mental Health Review Tribunals have a duty to give adequate reasons for their decisions. The scope of this duty has recently been considered by the Court.1

The Facts

The patient was detained under Section 37/41 of the Act. He sought judicial review of a decision by the Tribunal not to grant conditional discharge.

The patient suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. The Tribunal had heard conflicting evidence as to whether he should be allowed to return to the community. This evidence included the fact that he had relapsed on a previous occasion and committed several serious sexual offences.

At the hearing, the Tribunal accepted that the patient had been responding well to his medication, but having "reflected" on his index offences and the fact that these appeared to be attributable both to his mental condition and his attitude to women (which was said to be separate from any illness), the Tribunal refused his conditional discharge.

The patient contended that the Tribunal had not properly addressed the criteria for discharge set out in Sections 72 and 73 of the Mental Health Act.

Court Decision

The Court held that the Tribunal had properly considered the first criteria, namely that the patient was suffering from a mental illness of a nature of degree that made it appropriate for him to be detained2.

However, as regards the second criterion, namely whether the detention was justified in the interests of the patient's own health and safety or with a view to the protection of others3, the Court felt that it was unclear how the Tribunal had considered the patient's attitude to women generally, how it had taken into account this attitude and indeed why it was considered to be relevant.

Accordingly, the Tribunal's reasons were inadequate as they did not consider what was meant by the word "reflected" nor was it clear as...