The High Court rejected Ms F’s challenge to the Circuit Court’s refusal to hear her appeal against an expired involuntary detention order, finding that the Circuit Court could neither affirm nor revoke an order that had been superseded by a later renewal order.
Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered the judgment on 8 November 2016. Ms F had been admitted under an order made on 7 October 2015. A mental health tribunal affirmed it on 27 October, the same day her psychiatrist made a renewal order that continued her detention. She appealed the tribunal’s decision the following day. On 10 November, the Circuit Court declined to hear the appeal because the original order had lapsed. A tribunal later affirmed the renewal order, and the Circuit Court affirmed that order on 15 December.
Ms F argued that the Circuit Court had wrongly restricted her statutory appeal and should have decided whether she was suffering from a mental disorder. She also challenged the appeal process under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights, and alleged that the Mental Health Commission’s handling of the process denied patients an effective opportunity to appeal.
The High Court held that the original appeal had been brought and heard, but its subject matter had expired. The renewal order supplanted the admission order; it could not be treated as an extension of that earlier order. The Circuit Court could not decide the appeal concerning the renewal order before a tribunal had reviewed it.
The judge found no evidence that the Commission had impeded or denied Ms F’s appeal, and said the legislation set no timeframe requiring a Circuit Court appeal to be heard before an admission order expired. He rejected the constitutional and discrimination arguments. He also held that Article 5 of the Convention was not engaged because the proceedings did not concern the lawfulness of Ms F’s detention; in any event, the statutory safeguards had been available and pursued.
The judgment described practical options for similar cases: parties may agree to amend an appeal to address a renewal order once a tribunal has affirmed it; otherwise, the Circuit Court may adjourn pending the tribunal’s decision or strike out the matter without further order, as appropriate. The judge said any legislative amendment to address the timing issue was for the Oireachtas.
The High Court declined all relief sought. It did not make a final decision on costs, which it said would be addressed after hearing the parties.