Alistair M. Campbell

The appellant appealed a decision of the Consent and Capacity Board confirming a physician’s finding that she was incapable of consenting to psychiatric medication.

The appeal alleged that the Board misapplied the statutory test for capacity under the Health Care Consent Act and that its findings lacked evidentiary support.

The court applied the standards of correctness for legal questions and reasonableness for factual or mixed questions.

It held that the Board properly applied the two‑part capacity test and reasonably concluded that the appellant could understand information about the treatment but could not appreciate the foreseeable consequences of refusing medication.

The evidentiary record, including physician testimony and clinical progress notes, supported the Board’s conclusion.

The appeal was dismissed.

A treating psychiatrist brought an interim motion under s. 19 of the Health Care Consent Act, 1996 seeking authorization to administer treatment pending the patient’s appeal from a Consent and Capacity Board decision finding her incapable of consenting to treatment.

Evidence showed the patient had ceased taking prescribed medications, resulting in escalating aggressive behaviour, seclusion, and clinical deterioration.

The court considered the statutory criteria for treatment pending appeal, including whether the treatment would substantially improve the patient’s condition, whether the benefits outweighed the risks, and whether the treatment was the least intrusive option.

The court found the statutory test met for administration of a mood stabilizing medication but declined to authorize antipsychotic medication pending the expedited appeal hearing.

An interim order was granted requiring administration of the mood stabilizing drug until the appeal was determined.