Kola v Department for Health and Ageing

Kola v Department for Health and Ageing concerned an appeal to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia regarding the detention of Mr Kola under the *Mental Health Act 2009* (SA). Mr Kola had been detained as an involuntary patient at the Glenside Campus of the Adelaide Mental Health Service. He sought judicial review of the decision to detain him, alleging that the decision-maker, Dr Smith, had made an error of law. The primary judge dismissed Mr Kola's application for judicial review, and Mr Kola appealed this decision to the Full Court.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether Dr Smith, in deciding to detain Mr Kola as an involuntary patient, had failed to consider a relevant consideration or had taken into account an irrelevant consideration, thereby constituting an error of law. Specifically, the Court had to determine if Dr Smith's assessment of Mr Kola's mental state and the necessity for his detention had been influenced by factors that were not permissible under the *Mental Health Act 2009* (SA).

The Full Court found that Dr Smith's decision-making process had been flawed. The Court reasoned that the Act requires a medical practitioner to be satisfied that a person is suffering from a mental illness and that, as a result, requires treatment and is a danger to themselves or others, or that their mental illness is likely to result in significant deterioration of their condition. The Court held that Dr Smith had impermissibly taken into account the views of Mr Kola's family regarding his behaviour, which were not themselves evidence of a mental illness or a danger, but rather interpretations of his behaviour. This reliance on the family's interpretations, rather than an independent assessment of the criteria prescribed by the Act, constituted an error of law.

Consequently, the Full Court allowed the appeal, quashed the decision of the primary judge, and remitted the matter to the State Administrative Tribunal for redetermination.