Pankiewicz v Poland 34151/04 (2008) ECHR 148: 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 2: | Line 2: | ||
==External link== | ==External link== | ||
[ | {{#bailii:[2008] ECHR 148}} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:15, 25 April 2021
It would be too rigid to expect immediate transfer from prison to psychiatric hospital but, although the delay of 2 months 25 days did not at first glance seem particularly excessive, on balance it was not acceptable and violated Article 5(1); the claimant had been compensated by the domestic court so was not a victim for Article 5(3) purposes; the Article 6 complaint was rejected for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies
External link
The following categories (in blue boxes) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: