A mental health service's attendance for the purpose of assessing whether statutory powers of involuntary detention are engaged does not create a doctor-patient or health care provider-patient relationship, and the scope of any duty of care arising from such contact does not include a duty to exercise the statutory power of detention. Police responding to a mentally ill person wielding a weapon in public do not owe a duty of care to that person where the imposition of such a duty would conflict with their duties to the public. The breach inquiry under the Shirt calculus must be prospective, not retrospective, and courts must guard against applying a counsel of perfection to the conduct of police and mental health professionals.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 44 later cases that cite this judgment.
20 of the 44 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.