The decision under s 32(1)(b) of the Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990 — whether it is more appropriate to deal with a defendant under Part 3 than in accordance with law — is a discretionary decision attracting House v The King principles on appellate review. The seriousness of the offence is always a relevant consideration but does not create a threshold bar to diversion. A Magistrate is entitled to consider the relationship between the mental condition and the offending conduct, and to draw inferences from the facts about whether the offending was impulsive or premeditated. The s 32(1)(a) jurisdictional fact question may attract Warren v Coombes principles, but this was left open.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 29 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 29 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.