Re D [2020] MHLO 51 (FTT)

Video tribunal hearing set aside (1) The decision in this case was set aside because it was not clear whether or not the patient had a reasonable opportunity to hear all the evidence that was given at the hearing: it was not possible to be sure that the patient had a fair hearing. (2) The patient's microphone had been muted for much of the time after giving her evidence at the outset because she "would not stop talking", but this did not amount to exclusion under Tribunal rule 38. [First-tier tribunal decisions are useful but not binding.]

Note

The Deputy Chamber President has asked for this statement to be published: "Permission has been granted by the First Tier Tribunal to publish this case on the MHLO website. This is not a reported judgement. The decision is only made in relation to this case and as a decision of the FTT, there is no obligation on any other FTT judge or panel to follow this."

Thanks

Thanks to Liz Conroy (Conroys Solicitors) for providing this decision.

She also provided following comment on the case: "With the use of video hearings remaining in place, it is imperative that all participants but especially P are able to fully engage in the hearing process. There is a real risk that this is not achieved through the video system and this case makes it clear that where it has not been achieved there will be an error in law."

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: No Bailii link (neutral citation is unknown or not applicable)
Download here

Subject(s):

Coronavirus cases🔍
First-tier Tribunal decisions🔍
Other Tribunal cases🔍

Date: 15/10/20🔍

Court: First-tier Tribunal🔍

Judge(s):

Jo Briggs🔍

Parties:

D🔍

Citation number(s):

What links here:

Published: 20/10/20 21:42

Cached: 2024-11-21 11:57:41