View source for MB v BEH MH NHS Trust (2011) UKUT 328 (AAC)

''Following the RC's evidence, without hearing other witnesses or submissions on the law and evidence, the Tribunal judge stated that the patient could not obtain a conditional discharge and invited the patient to withdraw his application; the patient withdrew and appealed against the Tribunal's consent to the withdrawal. (1) Consent to withdrawal is a judicial act and is appealable. (2) The judge's expression of a preconceived concluded opinion (as opposed to a provisional view) amounted to a breach of the rules of natural justice and fair procedure in that the appellant was effectively denied a proper opportunity to put his case. (3) The UT's concerns about remedy (that there had been no application to reinstate the case and no re-application by the patient during the relevant eligibility period) were outweighed by the practical benefit of a fresh hearing and the patient, if unsuccessful, retaining his right to apply during the current eligibility period; therefore, the matter was set aside and referred to the Chamber President for directions to arrange a hearing by a completely differently constituted panel in order that a fresh decision be made.''

==Other==
Hearing: 10/8/11

Judgment: 12/8/11

Before: UT Judge Levenson

Roger Pezzani (instructed by Kaim Todner Solicitors) for the Appellant

The First Respondent (Trust) and Second Respondent (Secretary of State for Justice) did not appear and were not represented

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2011) UKUT 328 (AAC)}}

[[Category:Upper Tribunal decisions]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2011 cases]]