The appellant, W.C., appealed a decision of the Consent and Capacity Board (the "Board") that confirmed his incapacity to consent to or refuse antipsychotic medication.
W.C. argued that the Board erred by accepting evidence obtained during an unlawful detention and by misinterpreting the test for capacity under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996 (HCCA).
The court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the invalidity of the appellant's admission under the Mental Health Act did not void the capacity assessment under the HCCA, and that the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine does not apply in this administrative context.
The court also found that the Board's application of the HCCA capacity test was reasonable, as the Board's conclusion that W.C. was unable to weigh the foreseeable outcomes of treatment was rooted in the evidentiary record.
