Grey v UK 34377/02 (2002) ECHR 854: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "{{stub}} " to "") |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
[http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2002/854.html Bailii] | [http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2002/854.html Bailii] | ||
[[Category:Absolute or conditional discharge]] | [[Category:Absolute or conditional discharge]] |
Revision as of 21:17, 26 May 2015
A Tribunal granted an absolute discharge because the claimant suffered from no mental disorder, but on judicial review this was quashed because they had not first considered conditional discharge; a subsequent Tribunal reclassified him and upheld continued detention; his complaint under Article 5(1)(e) was rejected (no duty immediately and unconditionally to release into the community), as were complaints under Article 5(4) (no undue delay) and Article 6 (no right to appeal).
Related judgments
Grey v UK 34377/02 [2002] ECHR 854
External link
The following categories (in blue boxes) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: