Court of Appeal makes determination on deprivation of liberty

The Court of Appeal has handed down its final order in a case focusing on what it means to be a “voluntary patient” in a psychiatric hospital.

The core issue in this case was when a voluntary patient may leave a psychiatric institution having regard to the provisions of the Mental Health Act 2001. The man in the case, “PL”, was refused permission to leave St Patrick’s University Hospital while a voluntary patient.

In a judgment delivered by Mr Justice Hogan, the Court found that “PL” had been prevented from leaving the hospital, in a way which interfered with his personal liberty without a legal basis.

The Court could not agree the decision to restrain the applicant from leaving the hospital on 21 November 2011 was a lawful one without the use of a statutory power under the 2001 Act, noting “voluntarism remains a cornerstone of our system of medical treatment”.

The Court referenced the rule of law-based democracy envisaged by the Constitution and the fundamental constitutional premise that the deprivation of personal liberty must be in accordance with law.

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, which appeared in the case as an amicus curiae, welcomed the ruling.

With reference to the provisions of the Constitution, national law and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Commission had argued that “PL” was unlawfully deprived of his liberty.

In its legal submissions to the Court, the Commission said: “Looking at (PL’s) subjective situation in context, and placing special weight on his repeated instructions to his solicitor that he wished to leave the hospital, the Commission concludes that, in all the circumstances, it is difficult to see how (PL’s) consent to remain in hospital can be said to have been both truly voluntary and fully informed.”