L. AGAINST SWEDEN
Doc ref: 10801/84 • ECHR ID: 001-49283
Document date: June 15, 1989
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32
(art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the convention"),
Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of
Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the convention
relating to the application lodged on 5 August 1983 by a Swedish
citizen, L, against Sweden (No. 10801/84);
Whereas on 7 November 1988 the Commission transmitted the said report
to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months
provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention
elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court
of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the convention;
Whereas in her application the applicant complained inter alia that
she had not enjoyed the procedural guarantees provided for in
Article 5, paragraph 4, and Article 6 (art. 5-4, art. 6) of the
convention in respect of a decision as to whether she should be
permanently discharged, or remain on provisional discharge, from a
psychiatric hospital, the applicant also raising issues under
Article 5, paragraph 5, and Article 13 (art. 5-5, art. 13) of the
convention;
Whereas the Commission declared the application admissible
on 20 January 1986 as regards the above-mentioned complaints and in
its report adopted on 3 October 1988 expressed unanimously the opinion
that there had been no violation of Article 5, paragraph 4, of
Article 5, paragraph 5, of Article 6, paragraph 1, or of Article 13
(art. 5-4, art. 5-5, art. 6-1, art. 13) of the convention;
Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance
with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the convention;
Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1
(art. 32-1), of the convention,
Decides that in this case there has been no violation of the
convention.