Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 7.11.1995 1617/6 AI generated

Administrative court quashes involuntary psychiatric hospitalization order due to insufficient medical assessment in referral letter.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 7.11.1995 1617/6
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Uusimaa quashed the chief physician's decision to admit the applicant to involuntary psychiatric hospital care. The applicant had been referred by a family doctor but the referral lacked specific justification for the mental illness and treatment necessity. The court ruled that without these essential details, the legal prerequisites for involuntary admission were not met.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Mielenterveyslaki 8 § 1 mom; 9 § 2 mom: Involuntary psychiatric hospitalization requires a referral letter containing specific justification for the mental illness and treatment necessity; absence of such details invalidates the legal prerequisites for compulsory admission.

Keywords

AI generated
involuntary psychiatric hospitalization medical assessment requirements referral letter deficiencies compulsory treatment prerequisites administrative court review mental health law procedural validity

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Mielenterveyslaki 8 § 1 mom
Mielenterveyslaki 9 § 2 mom
AI generated
admin_1995_uusimaa-county__272
Mental health compulsory observation valid if prior voluntary care failed and referral justified necessity.
admin_1995_northern-karelia-county__127
Administrative court dismissed involuntary psychiatric hospitalization continuation due to procedural error in prior order.
admin_2009_helsinki__504
Administrative court upheld psychiatrist's order to continue involuntary psychiatric hospitalization under Mental Health Act.
admin_2004_helsinki__880
Administrative court dismissed appeal as inadmissible due to lack of legal interest in the contested decision.
admin_1991_uusimaa-county__1035
Administrative court dismissed psychiatric hospitalization continuation due to lack of mental illness diagnosis.

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 toimitettu psykiatriseen sairaalahoitoon terveyskeskuslääkärin

tarkkailulähetteellä ja määrätty tarkkailuajan

jälkeen hoitoon hänen tahdostaan riippumatta.

Tarkkailulähetteestä oli jäänyt täyttämättä kohta muiden

mielenterveyspalveluiden soveltuvuudesta tai riittävyydestä

eikä tämä seikka ollut käynyt muutoinkaan ilmi lähetteestä.

Tarkkailulähetteessä ei ollut myöskään tarkemmin perusteltu

A:n mielisairautta ja hoidon tarvetta. Tarkkailulähetteen

puutteellisuuksien vuoksi edellytyksiä A:n tarkkailuun ottamiselle

ja määräämiselle tahdosta riippumattomaan psykiatriseen

sairaalahoitoon ei näin ollen ollut ollut olemassa.

A:n valituksen johdosta lääninoikeus kumosi ylilääkärin

päätöksen.

MielenterveysL 8 § 1 mom

MielenterveysL 9 § 2 mom