Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Helsingin HAO 14.12.2001 01/0992/6 AI generated

Administrative court rejected psychiatric hospitalization order because the care home lacked statutory psychiatric care unit status.

Case Number Helsingin HAO 14.12.2001 01/0992/6
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court refused to uphold the decision to continue psychiatric hospitalization for the applicant. The applicant had resided in a care home since July 2001, but the court determined this facility did not meet the legal requirements of the Mental Health Act to function as a psychiatric care unit. Consequently, the original order for continued hospitalization was not validated due to the facility's non-compliance with statutory standards.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Mental Health Act s. 2(1); A psychiatric care unit must possess specific statutory qualifications to authorize hospitalization, and a facility failing these criteria cannot legally sustain a continuation order.

Keywords

AI generated
Mental Health Act psychiatric care unit hospitalization order care home status administrative review statutory qualifications continuation of care

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Mental Health Act s. 2(1)
AI generated
admin_2012_kuopio__521
Administrative court quashes involuntary psychiatric care continuation due to lack of independent external doctor's opinion.
admin_2013_helsinki__574
Administrative court upheld psychiatrist's decision to continue involuntary care despite external monitoring doctor's lack of access to patient records.
admin_1997_uusimaa-county__495
Administrative court dismisses psychiatric compulsory treatment extension due to statutory six-month validity limit.
admin_2002_kuopio__633
Administrative court upheld involuntary psychiatric hospitalization despite procedural delay exceeding statutory six-month deadline.
admin_2013_helsinki__427
Administrative court upheld mandatory psychiatric hospitalization continuation based on patient's mental state and safety risks.

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

Sairaalan psykiatrisesta hoidosta vastaava apulaisylilääkäri

oli määrännyt A:n tahdosta riippumatonta psykiatrista

sairaalahoitoa jatkettavaksi. Päätös, jolla A:n hoitoa oli

jatkettu, oli tehty 18.9.2001. A oli 3.7.2001 alkaen asunut

Niemikotisäätiön tuetussa pienkodissa. Hallinto-oikeus

katsoi, että sanottu pienkoti ei ollut mielenterveysasetuksen

2 §:n 1 momentissa tarkoitettu sairaalan psykiatrista

hoitoa antava yksikkö, jolla on edellytykset antaa

psykiatrista hoitoa. Hallinto-oikeus jätti hoitoonmääräämispäätöksen

vahvistamatta.

Mielenterveysasetus 2 § 1 mom