Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Lapin LO 22.8.1991 987 AI generated

Mental health care continuation decision by treating physician was not subject to county court review.

Case Number Lapin LO 22.8.1991 987
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The administrative court dismissed the appeal because the county court refused to review the treating physician's decision to continue involuntary mental health care. The physician made a decision under the Mental Health Care Act to continue treatment against the patient's will, which the county court rejected as not being a reviewable decision under the relevant section. The court held that since the decision did not fall within the scope of the specific provision requiring county court approval, it could not be submitted for review via the standard procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Mielenterveyslain 12 § 1 momentti; päätös, joka ei kuulu 12 §:n 1 momentin tarkoitukseen, ei voi saapua alistuksin lääninoikeuden vahvistettavaksi.

Keywords

AI generated
Mental Health Care Act involuntary treatment administrative review county court jurisdiction treatment continuation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Mielenterveyslaki 12 § 1 momentti
AI generated
admin_1997_uusimaa-county__495
Administrative court dismisses psychiatric compulsory treatment extension due to statutory six-month validity limit.
admin_1998_hame-county__628
Court dismisses complaint regarding missed deadline for involuntary psychiatric treatment continuation decision.
admin_2002_kuopio__633
Administrative court upheld involuntary psychiatric hospitalization despite procedural delay exceeding statutory six-month deadline.
admin_1991_uusimaa-county__1035
Administrative court dismissed psychiatric hospitalization continuation due to lack of mental illness diagnosis.
admin_2009_helsinki__504
Administrative court upheld psychiatrist's order to continue involuntary psychiatric hospitalization under Mental Health Act.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

A oli 27.12.1990 otettu hoidettavaksi vasten tahtoaan mielisairaalaan.

Vastuunalainen lääkäri alisti mielenterveyslain

12 §:n 1 momentin nojalla lääninoikeuden vahvistettavaksi

20.3.1991 tekemänsä päätöksen vastoin A:n tahtoa tapahtuvan

hoidon jatkamisesta. Lääninoikeus vahvisti 24.4.1991 vastuunalaisen

lääkärin päätöksen.

Vastuunalainen lääkäri teki 17.6.1991 uuden päätöksen A:n

vastentahtoisen hoidon jatkamisesta ja alisti päätöksensä

lääninoikeuden vahvistettavaksi. Lääninoikeus ei tutkinut

asiaa, koska päätöstä, jota ei pidetty mielenterveyslain

12 §:n 1 momentissa tarkoitettuna päätöksenä, ei voitu saattaa

alistuksin lääninoikeuden vahvistettavaksi.