GJ v The Foundation Trust & Anor

GJ v The Foundation Trust & Anor

GJ was not ineligible to be deprived of liberty under the MCA because, applying the 'but for' test, the only effective reason for his detention in hospital was treatment for diabetes, not treatment for his mental disorder; therefore, the standard authorisation under DOLS was lawful.

Parties
Claimant: GJ; First Respondent: The Foundation Trust; Second Respondent: The PCT; Third Respondent: The Secretary of State for Health
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Application Under S.21 a Mental Capacity Act 2005 / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed; standard authorisation under DOLS upheld as lawful.
Legal Topics
Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, Eligibility for Detention, Relationship Between MHA 1983 and MCA 2005, Statutory Construction, Primacy of Statutory Regimes
Mental Health Law Mental Capacity Law Human Rights Law Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Eligibility for Detention Relationship Between MHA 1983 and MCA 2005 Statutory Construction Primacy of Statutory Regimes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GJ

Claimant

The Foundation Trust

First Respondent

The PCT

Second Respondent

The Secretary of State for Health

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under S.21 a Mental Capacity Act 2005 / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether GJ was ineligible to be deprived of liberty under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 due to the primacy of the Mental Health Act 1983
  2. 2 Proper construction of 'could' in Schedule 1A paragraph 12(1) MCA 2005
  3. 3 Application of the 'but for' test to determine purpose of detention

Ratio Decidendi

GJ was not ineligible to be deprived of liberty under the MCA because, applying the 'but for' test, the only effective reason for his detention in hospital was treatment for diabetes, not treatment for his mental disorder; therefore, the standard authorisation under DOLS was lawful.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; standard authorisation under DOLS upheld as lawful.

Orders

  • Court finds GJ was not ineligible to be deprived of liberty under MCA.
  • No further orders; standard authorisation remains in force.