View source for Grant v MHRT (1986) The Times 28/4/86

''The Tribunal has no power to make statutory recommendations under [[s72]](3) in restricted cases.''

==Extracts from judgment==
Grant v The Mental Health Review Tribunal for the Trent Region comes before the Court by way of case stated, pursuant to section 78(8) of the Mental Health Act 1983. The question of law for the opinion of the Court is, whether, when a Mental Health Review Tribunal is considering an application made under section 70 of the Act by a patient detained under sections 37 and 41 of the Act, it has the power to make a statutory recommendation for transfer under section 72(3)(a) of the Act to another hospital, and by virtue of section 72(3)(b) to further consider the case in the event of any such recommendation not being complied with.

...

To conclude, I do not find that the statute, either expressly or by implication, empowers a Tribunal dealing with the case of a restricted patient to exercise the power given to it by section 72(3) when dealing with an unrestricted patient. The answer to the question posed in the case stated in the circumstances therefore is "No".

==Other==
Before: McNeill J

Hearing: 23/4/86

O Thorold for the Applicant Grant; O Thorold for the Applicant O'Hara; R Ter Harr for the Respondents

Bower Cotton & Bower, Agents for Bryan & Armstrong, Mansfield; RM Broudie & Co, Liverpool; the Treasury Solicitor

==Judgment (Crown Copyright)==
{{text|(1986) The Times 28/4/86}}

==Citations==
CO/489/85, CO/204/86, The Times 28 April 1986

==See also==

[[Extra-statutory recommendations]]

==External link==
{{#bailii:no ncn}}

[[Category:Judgment available on MHLO]]

[[Category:Powers]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:No transcript]]
[[Category:1986 cases]]