MDF v Central Queensland Network Authorised Mental Health Service & Anor

[2020] QCA 108

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Reviewable decisions
4. › Decision of an administrative character made under an enactment
5. › Whether decisions under Mental Health Act made by authorised mental health service or by individual doctors and practitioners
6. › Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), ss 4, 20, 31, 32, 38
7. › Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld), ss 39, 49, 502, 504
1. Administrative Law
2. › Reasons for administrative decisions
3. › Request for reasons
4. › Right to request statement of reasons under Judicial Review Act
5. › Whether person subject to examination authority entitled to reasons for decision to issue authority
6. › Whether decision spent or inoperative
7. › Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), ss 32, 33, 34, 38
1. Administrative Law
2. › Reasons for administrative decisions
3. › Public interest immunity
4. › Attorney-General's certificate under s 36 of Judicial Review Act
5. › Whether statement of reasons would be false or misleading if redacted information excluded
6. › Whether redacted statement could be provided
7. › Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), ss 36, 37
1. Administrative Law
2. › Natural justice
3. › Right to be heard
4. › Whether person subject of application for examination authority entitled to notice and hearing
5. › Implied exclusion of natural justice by statutory scheme
6. › Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld), ss 503, 703, 733, 736

Quick Take

A person who is the subject of an examination authority issued by the Mental Health Review Tribunal under the Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld) is entitled to request and receive a statement of reasons for the Tribunal's decision under the Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), notwithstanding that the person was not a party to or entitled to be heard at the hearing of the application for the authority. Where an Attorney-General's certificate under s 36 of the Judicial Review Act applies, the Tribunal may provide a redacted statement of reasons using black masking without the statement being 'false or misleading' under s 37(1)(b). Decisions under the Mental Health Act made by individual doctors or authorised mental health practitioners are not decisions of the authorised mental health service and cannot be the subject of requests for reasons directed to the service.