Appeals heard by the Mental Health Court

Each published appeal decision has been allocated a deidentified case code for reference by MHRT staff and Members. These codes are not used by, or understood, by anyone outside the MHRT. All deidentified appeals below have been summarised in a register for each of reference. Within the register, the appeal decisions are categorised by topic and the summaries can be searched for keywords by searching using Crtl-F.

Case law summaries

Mental Health Court (MHC) appeals of MHRT decisions

Appeals heard by the Mental Health Court

Case law summaries

AppealtoMHC00C: Dismissed, TSO was sufficient rather than FO

AppealtoMHC00E: Dismissed, ECT approved - Academic papers, interpret s509(3)(b)

AppealtoMHC003: Upheld, found NFFT - Not able to give proper instructions, no insight

AppealtoMHC005: Upheld, FO revoked TSO made - TSO sufficient rather than FO

AppealtoMHC00A: Upheld, FO revoked TSO made - TSO was sufficient rather than FO

AppealtoMHC00D: Upheld, ECT refused - Second opinion required

AppealtoMHC00B: Upheld, FO reinstated - Transition to nursing home. Role of AG

AppealtoMHC001: Upheld, TSO made - Role of AG, due regard to unanimous opinion

AppealtoMHC004: Upheld, FO category changed - Conditional orders (category) not permitted

AppealtoMHC006: Dismissed, TSO was sufficient rather than FO - risk to physical vs mental illness

AppealtoMHC007/SAL: Upheld, FO category changed - Category when person in custody

AppealtoMHC008/BAC: Upheld, FO conditions changed - FO(MH) with only intellectual disability, care not treatment

AppealtoMHC009/SWZ: Upheld, FO revoked TSO made - whether a current mental illness is required

AppealtoMHC010: Dismissed, TA confirmed - MHC providing pt info to be in better position to have TA revoked

AppealtoMHC011: Upheld, FO confirmed, conditions changed - MHRT did not permit LCT, MHC did

AppealtoMHC012: Dismissed, ECT approved - Factors MHC considered in approving ECT

AppealtoMHC013: Dismissed, TA confirmed - Considered voluntary private treatment, lack of insight and concept of "less restrictive"

AppealtoMHC014: Dismissed, TA confirmed - Considered MHRT's refusal to adjourn to provide pt with opportunity to submit more material

AppealtoMHC015: Upheld, ECT refused - Updated reports, considered human rights, best interests, patient's view

AppealtoMHC016: Upheld, TSO revoked - New information available, evidence "all one way"

AppealtoMHC017: Dismissed, TA confirmed - MHC endorsed MHRT's reasoning incl human rights

AppealtoMHC018: Dismissed, FO confirmed - Interpretation s422, weight given to human rights, FO or TSO relative to risk

AppealtoMHC022: Dismissed - FO and conditions approved - MHC satisfied with LCT being authorised at discretion of treating doctor

AppealtoMHC021: Stay refused re ECT - Consideration of side effects of ECT

AppealtoMHC020: Upheld, FO revoked - Found no mental illness at time of offence (cannot be readily applied to other cases)

AppealtoMHC019: Dismissed, TSO confirmed - MHC was satisfied FO could be revoked and TSO made on same conditions

AppealtoMHC002: Dismissed, cross appeal allowed, no order made - meaning of mental condition

AppealtoMHC023: Dismissed, TSO confirmed - Daily direct medical supervision considered in confirming TSO

AppealtoMHC025: Dismissed, TSO made - MHC confirmed risk arising from legal rights in family law matter beyond scope of FO

AppealtoMHC024/GLH: Dismissed, FO conditions confirmed - Considered interaction human rights and MHA, include conditions if they limit HR where necessary re unacceptable risk, ongoing drug use, weight re historic vs current risk

AppealtoMHC026: Dismissed, ECT approved - Reasons address capacity to consent to ECT, human rights considerations and best interests

AppealtoMHC027: Dismissed, TA confirmed - Considered if delusions need to be investigated before concluding mental illness and what is risk of deterioration or risk of harm

AppealtoMHC028: Dismissed, TSO confirmed - Considered difference between FO and TSO, risk of alcohol use, whether alcohol condition could be removed

AppealtoMHC029: Dismissed, TA confirmed - MHC said "line ball" decision, differing clinical opinions, improved insight and capacity

AppealtoMHC030: Upheld, FO revoked TSO made. MHC confirmed nature of appeal hearing is de novo. MHC details the facts that it considers supported that risk could be managed under TSO

AppealtoMHC033:Dismissed, FO confirmed. MHC considered "interested person", whether appeal was "frivolous", inpatient status as a consequence of reduced NDIS funding, role of NDIS vs FO/MHA2016

AppealtoMHC034: Upheld, FO(D) revoked. Reasons note factors given weight in revocation. Assisting Psychiatrists raise deficiencies in TOE report and provide advice on how certain factors can be included in risk assessment.

AppealtoMHC035: MHC revoked FO(D) because it was not mitigating risk or protecting community in a meaningful way. MHC satisfied other protective factors were mitigating risk.

AppealtoMHC036: Consider application of ECT criteria when patient's views, wishes and preferences were clear - not in favour of ECT

AppealtoMHC037: Considered capacity including timing of assessment, support from another person and views of patient's supports

AppealtoMHC038: MHC expressed purpose of FO regime, impact of substances (incl. on driving), proceeding hearing without patient and restraints are not loosened to motivate patient.

"AppealtoMHC032: Dismissed, TSO confirmed. MHC commented on the contents of clinical reports including what should and shouldn't be addressed, confirmed how to consider charges the subject of an unsoundness finding and commented on weighting of evidence

AppealtoMHC031: FO and conditions confirmed. MHC considered appropriateness (including human rights) of condition restricting access to mobile phone/internet for person with intellectual disability and history of sexual offending (inc. via internet)

AppealtoMHC039: Upheld, TA revoked: Change in circumstances saw a reduction in risk to patient and others. TA criteria not met.

AppealtoMHC040: Dismissed, ECT approved: MHC reasons set out how MHC considered criteria (for adult without capacity to give informed consent)

AppealtoMHC041: Dismissed TA confirmed - MHC considered application of elements of section 14 definition of capacity (anorexia)

AppealstoMHC042/ICO: Allowed, ECT refused - MHC considered capacity (s233(2)(a)), appropriateness of ECT re least restrictive and alternative treatments, human rights in ECT

AppealtoMHC044: Dismissed, ECT approved. Pt opposed ECT. Pt sought second adjournment for legal rep, refused on clinical grounds. ECT approved given nature of symptoms and pt's aim for discharge. TT trailed multiple meds.

AppealtoMHC043: Dismissed, ECT approved. Patient strongly opposed to ECT. MHC approved ECT given nature of symptoms and risk to self. Treating team trialled multiple medications

AppealtoMHC045: Upheld, TA revoked. Insufficient evidence for Court to be satisfied treatment criteria met. Insufficient evidence of risk.

AppealtoMHC046: Dismissed, TSO confirmed. Note Court's views re clinical relationship breakdown, treatment in the private sector, patient�s ongoing cannabis use.

AppealtoMHC047/FYS: Dismissed, ECT approved. Assessing capacity delusional thinking or lack of insight; pt understood nature but not effect of decision; ECT appropriate in circumstances; pt unable to hear explanation

AppealtoMHC048: Dismissed, FO conditions confirmed. Deciding LCT and applying unacceptable risk test and having regard to victim views, risk of harm to victim, and community expectations

AppealtoMHC049: Allowed, Decision to make TSO replaced with decision to make no further order. Considering utility of order given source and severity of risk

AppealtoMHC050: Dismissed, Consideration of the level oversight possible under a TSO, MHC indicated that ARMC oversight that was mandatory under FO was still possible as was assertive engagement under TSO

AppealtoMHC051: Allowed, Applying test regarding 'unacceptable risk' when determining LCT and consideration of views of an potential harm to victims

AppealtoMHC052: Allowed, Revocation of PPO FO with independent report ordered by the MHC

AppealtoMHC053: Allowed, Decision to revoke FO and make TSO set aside, FO confirmed community category, level of oversight and management on FO versus TSO

AppealtoMHC054: Dismissed, ECT Approved - Consideration of criteria to approve ECT

AppealtoMHC055: Allowed, ECT refused - Sufficiency of evidence for treatment-resistance, effectiveness of ECT for particular illness. Impact of patient's visa status

AppealtoMHC056: Dismissed, ECT Approved - Capacity to consent and relationship to insight

AppealtoMHC057: Allowed, FO(D) confirmed, authorised doctor may change category, amended conditions to mitigate risk

AppealtoMHC058 – Allowed, FO(MH) confirmed, community category, authorised doctor may change category, order that upon release from custody doctor make assessment as to category

AppealtoMHC059 – Dismissed, TA confirmed, medication compliance and consideration of capacity

AppeatoMHC060 – Dismissed, TA confirmed, treatment criteria – capacity, risk regarding specific diagnosis

AppealtoMHC061 - Dismissed, TA confirmed, compatibility of decision to confirm TA with the Human Rights Act

AppealtoMHC062 – Dismissed, FO confirmed – Extension of LCT considering risk and victims

MHC063: Appeal dismissed FO confirmed – unacceptable risk provision of LCT, MHC view of treating team management

MHC064: Upheld, FO confirmed, LCT changed, additional conditions retained – Consideration of compatibility of MHA2016 and HRA2109, balancing human rights and risk to community

MHC065: Appeal dismissed, TSO confirmed – treatment under a forensic order versus treatment support order, patient subject to order living interstate.

AppealtoMHC066 - Appeal dismissed FO(D) revoked – FO(D) operated as intended to provide appropriate care

AppealtoMHC067 – Appeal upheld, FO reinstated – revocation not supported by treating team or ARMC