The claimant complained that the status of the medical member in a mental health review tribunal was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. That member was obliged first to form an opinion of the patient’s condition, and then to adjudicate.
Held: The position of the medical member was peculiar and very sensitive. The guidance given to tribunal members emphasised the need for the medical member to keep an open mind. The position was analogous to a judge viewing the locus in quo in case. He would form his own opinion, but had to preserve his readiness to listen to the opinions of experts. There was no objection to the expression of a provisional opinion by a judge.
Stanley Burton J
Times 06-Dec-2002, Gazette 30-Jan-2003
European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – DN v Switzerland ECHR 29-Mar-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-4; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Health, Human Rights
Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.178351
