The appellant appealed a Consent and Capacity Board finding that she was incapable with respect to treatment by antipsychotic medication under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996.
The court applied reasonableness review to factual and mixed findings, correctness to pure law, and held the practitioner bore the burden of rebutting the presumption of capacity on a balance of probabilities.
The court found there was corroborative evidence and sufficient evidence supporting the Board's two-part incapacity analysis, including evidence from both the treating physician and the appellant's own testimony.
The court also held the Board's reasons were adequate in context and entitled to deference given the statutory timelines for Board proceedings.
The appeal was dismissed and the Board decision was upheld.
