Required medical evidence for court to be satisfied treatment condition is met in relation to remand to hospital
13(1)A court considering whether to remand an accused person to hospital under section 162(1) may regard the treatment condition as met where the court—
(a)is satisfied that complying with the requirement under section 165(3) for the evidence of at least two registered medical practitioners in accordance with that provision is impractical or would involve undesirable delay, and
(b)is satisfied on the written or oral evidence of a single relevant medical practitioner of the matters of which it would (but for this paragraph) have to be satisfied on the evidence of at least two practitioners as referred to in sub-paragraph (a),
and any other requirements for the treatment condition to be met are satisfied.
(2)In sub-paragraph (1)(b), “relevant medical practitioner” means a medical practitioner referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) (as the case may be) of section 165(3).