DL-H v West London Mental Health Trust and Secretary of State for Justice
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | UTJ Jacobs |
| Judgment Date | 28 September 2017 |
| Neutral Citation | [2017] UKUT 387 (AAC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Docket Number | HM/1386/2017 |
| Date | 28 September 2017 |
Neutral Citation: [2017] UKUT 387 (AAC)
Court and Reference: Upper Tribunal (AAC)
Judge: UTJ Jacobs
HM/1386/2017
Facts: The detention of DL-H, a restricted patient, was upheld by a Tribunal; it found that he had schizophrenia and one or more personality disorders, had benefitted from treatment, needed to be in hospital as he did not accept that he was ill and so would disengage and deteriorate. The Tribunal granted permission to appeal, the grounds being: (i) in relation to the contention of DL-H that what were taken as symptoms of mental disorder were in fact manifestations of religious belief, the Tribunal erred in accepting the evidence of doctors over the evidence of religious experts (who had indicated that DL-H's beliefs were within the range considered normal in the Pentecostal Church); (ii) the Tribunal was wrong to conclude that DL-H had a dissocial personality disorder, given that the evidence before it was that he had an emotionally unstable personality disorder; (iii) the reasons were inadequately clear. In its response, the hospital noted evidence that was before the Tribunal but not referred to in its reasons; DL-H contended that this was impermissible, given that the reasons had to be comprehensible.
This decision is given under s11 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007:
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal under reference MP/2016/11134, made on 13 March 2017, did not involve the making of an error on a point of law.
1. In 2006, the patient was convicted of burglary and arson and made the subject of hospital and restriction orders under ss37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983. He currently has diagnoses of schizophrenia and personality disorder. He had been convicted of a range of offences from 1982 and h ad been known to the mental health services since late 2003. He applied to the First -tier Tribunal on 25 April 2016 and his application was heard over 6 days, at the end of which the tribunal decided that he should remained liable to be detained. The First-tier Tribunal gave him permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal.
2. The patient and the hospital at which he is detained both made submissions on the appeal. Neither asked for an oral hearing and I consider that one is not required. The Secretary of State did not take any part.
3. It is convenient to deal with the issues raised by this appeal under the headings that were used by the patient's solicitor in the application for permission and adopted by the judge who gave permission. Before I come to them, I need to need with a preliminary issue raised in the patient's reply to the hospital's response.
4. In its response, counsel for the hospital referred to evidence that was before the tribunal but not mentioned in its reasons. In his reply, counsel for the patient objected, arguing that this material was ‘extraneous to the decision’ and that the correct approach was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
DL-H v West London Mental Health Trust and the Secretary of State for Justice
...-H V WEST LONDON MENTAL HEALTH TRUST AND THE SOFS FOR JUSTICE [2017] UKUT 387 (AAC) UPPER TRIBUNAL CASE NO: DECISION OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER) Save for the cover sheet, this decision may be made public (rule 14(7) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules......