DD v Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2022] UKUT 166 (AAC)

Change of status - s37/41 to conditional discharge DD applied to the MHT while subject to a s37/41 restricted hospital order but, before the hearing, was conditionally discharged: the MHT decided that it ceased to have jurisdiction. He appealed to the UT but, before that hearing, was absolutely discharged: the UT decided that it retained jurisdiction and should decide the case despite it being academic. The UT concluded that the MHT retain jurisdiction when a s37/41 patient is conditionally discharged.

Thanks

Thanks to Adam Marley (GT Stewart Solicitors & Advocates, solicitor for the patient) for providing the judgment.

Judicial summary from Gov.uk

Appeal that became academic before hearing by the Upper Tribunal - principles applied by the courts in public law matters not applicable - principles to be developed in Upper Tribunal on a case by case basis - reasons for dealing with academic issue set out.

Mental health - patient subject to hospital and restriction orders when he applied to the First-tier Tribunal, but conditionally discharged before the application was heard - tribunal retained jurisdiction.


External links

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII
Download here

Subject(s):

  • Change of status cases🔍
  • Upper Tribunal decisions🔍

Date: 23/6/22🔍

Court: Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)🔍

Judge(s):

Parties:

  • DD🔍
  • Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust🔍
  • Secretary of State for Justice🔍
  • Mind🔍

Citation number(s):

What links here:

Published: 11/7/22 15:43

Cached: 2024-04-24 12:57:26

Retrieved from "https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/index.php?title=DD_v_Sussex_Partnership_NHS_Foundation_Trust_(2022)_UKUT_166_(AAC)&oldid=60014"