X v UK 7215/75 (1981) ECHR 6: Difference between revisions

m (Text replacement - "{{stub}} " to "")
m (Text replacement - "\[http:\/\/www\.bailii\.org\/.*\/cases\/(UKSC|ECHR|UKPC|EWCOP|EWFC|UKHL|PBRA)\/(.*)\/(.*)\.html Bailii\]" to "{{#bailii:[$2] $1 $3}}")
 
Line 9: Line 9:


==External link==
==External link==
[http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/1981/6.html Bailii]
{{#bailii:[1981] ECHR 6}}





Latest revision as of 11:15, 25 April 2021

(1) Under Article 5(1), the recall to hospital without the usual Winterwerp guarantees was lawful as it was an emergency; the further detention followed examination by the RMO so was also lawful; (2) Habeas corpus proceedings were inadequate for Article 5(4) purposes; the other legal machinery did not remedy this breach, in particular because the MHRT could not order discharge of restricted patients.

Related judgments

X v UK 7215/75 [1982] ECHR 8

Winterwerp v Netherlands 6301/73 [1979] ECHR 4

External link

BAILII