Regina on the Application of PD v West Midlands and North West Mental Health Review Tribunal: CA 17 Mar 2004

The medical member of the review tribunal to which the appellant had applied for his discharge from detention under section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 who was a consultant psychiatrist was not disqualified from considering the appellant’s case because he was employed by the Mersey Care National Health Service Trust: ‘We consider that [the reasonable and informed] observer would expect a consultant psychiatrist to apply the same concerns for the welfare of a patient, whether that patient was the consultant’s own, or a patient whose liberty depended upon the objective clinical judgment of the consultant in the context of a tribunal hearing.’
Lord Justice May The Hon Mr Justice Parker Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr
[2004] EWCA Civ 311
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedGillies v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 26-Jan-2006
The claimant said that the medical member of the tribunal which had heard his disability claim was biased. The doctor was on a temporary contract and also worked for an agency which contracted directly the Benfits Agency. The court of session had . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 January 2021; Ref: scu.194581