Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Hämeen LO 18.6.1992 709/3 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed appeal against psychiatrist's decision for minor's involuntary psychiatric hospitalization.

Case Number Hämeen LO 18.6.1992 709/3
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of the County of Hämeenlinna upheld the lower court's decision regarding a psychiatrist's order for involuntary psychiatric hospitalization of a minor. The psychiatric authority determined the treatment was necessary independent of the minor's consent, while the father argued he was not properly notified due to an undelivered letter. The court found the procedural defect in service of notice did not invalidate the substantive decision for the minor's protection.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Mielenterveyslaki 8 § 2 mom; Mielenterveyslaki 11 §; Mielenterveyslaki 24 §; Mielenterveysasetus 8 §: A decision for involuntary psychiatric hospitalization of a minor remains valid even if the father was not properly notified, provided the authority acted independently of the minor's consent and the procedural defect did not affect the decision's legality.

Keywords

AI generated
involuntary psychiatric hospitalization minor patient consent father notification procedure Mielenterveyslaki provisions administrative court review procedural defect validity psychiatric authority decision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Mielenterveyslaki 8 § 2 mom
Mielenterveyslaki 8 § 2 mom
Mielenterveyslaki 11 §
Mielenterveyslaki 24 §
Mielenterveysasetus 8 §
AI generated
insurance_2012_4348-2011
Finnish Insurance Court dismissed mother's child benefit claim as father de facto cared for child despite court orders.
admin_1991_turku-and-pori-county__543
Spouse of non-father guardian kept as party in custody case; appeal on standing rejected.
admin_1991_uusimaa-county__1035
Administrative court dismissed psychiatric hospitalization continuation due to lack of mental illness diagnosis.
admin_2005_vaasa__150
Father's right to be heard in child custody proceedings was upheld despite initial social board exclusion.
appeal_1983_kouvola__1243
Custody order remains valid despite later paternity ruling; custody not automatically revoked by subsequent paternity decision.

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

Lääninoikeus vahvisti vastuunalaisen lääkärin päätöksen alaikäisen A:n tahdosta riippumattomasta psykiatrisesta sairaalahoidosta. Hoitoonmääräämispäätöstä ei oltu saatu annettua tiedoksi A:n biologiselle isälle. Isälle väestön keskusrekisterin mukaiseen Norjassa olevaan osoitteeseen lähetetty tiedoksiantokirje oli palannut avaamattomana sairaalaan. A:n vanhemmat olivat eronneet vuonna 1976 ja A oli määrätty äitinsä huollettavaksi. A oli asiakirjojen mukaan tavannut isänsä vain kerran vanhempien avioeron jälkeen.

Mielenterveyslaki 8 § 2 mom

Mielenterveyslaki 11 §

Mielenterveyslaki 24 §

Mielenterveysasetus 8 §