The appellant appealed a decision of the Consent and Capacity Board confirming his attending physician's finding that he lacked capacity to consent to psychiatric treatment.
The appellant argued procedural unfairness and that the finding of incapacity was unreasonable.
The Superior Court of Justice found no procedural unfairness but concluded the Board's decision on capacity was unreasonable.
The court noted a lack of evidence that the physician had actually explained the proposed treatment, its consequences, or alternatives to the appellant, which is a prerequisite to finding an inability to appreciate reasonably foreseeable consequences.
The appeal was allowed and a new hearing ordered.
