View source for Overriding objective (MHT)

{{Information-header}}
This is a new innovation in the Tribunal rules, which is borrowed from the Civil Procedure Rules. It is worth setting out rule 2 in full, as it is a useful tool for representatives when seeking directions etc:

<blockquote>
Overriding objective and parties’ obligation to co-operate with the Tribunal
2.—(1) The overriding objective of these Rules is to enable the Tribunal to deal with cases '''fairly and justly'''. 

(2) Dealing with a case fairly and justly includes—
:(a) dealing with the case in ways which are '''proportionate''' to the importance of the case, the complexity of the issues, the anticipated costs and the resources of the parties;
:(b) '''avoiding unnecessary formality''' and seeking flexibility in the proceedings;
:(c) ensuring, so far as practicable, that the parties are able to '''participate fully''' in the proceedings;
:(d) using any special '''expertise''' of the Tribunal effectively; and
:(e) '''avoiding delay''', so far as compatible with proper consideration of the issues.

(3) The Tribunal must seek to give effect to the overriding objective when it—
:(a) exercises any power under these Rules; or
:(b) interprets any rule or practice direction.

(4) Parties must—
:(a) '''help''' the Tribunal to further the overriding objective; and
:(b) '''co-operate''' with the Tribunal generally.
</blockquote>

The overriding objective was discussed in the first reported Upper Tribunal decision, Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v MH [2009] UKUT 4 (AAC) at [13]:

<blockquote>
That requires parties to cooperate and liaise with each other concerning procedural matters, with a view to agreeing a procedural course promptly where they are able to do so, before making any application to the tribunal. This is particularly to be expected where parties have legal representation. … We stress that, in the context of an urgent application in the mental health jurisdiction, this liaison between the parties must not lead to any [avoidable] delay.
</blockquote>

Paragraph (4) does not appear in the Welsh Rules.

The overriding objective featured in [[Re A (2020) MHLO 14 (FTT)]], a case in which the patient successful argued for an all-female panel as the her mental state meant that she could only attend the hearing or pre-hearing medical examination if the panel were all female.

{{Information-footer
|maincat=Mental Health Tribunal pages
}}