LV v UK 50718/16 (2019) MHLO 32 (ECHR): Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 11:54, 8 October 2021

MHT/Parole Board delay LV, a s47/49 patient, had argued that there had been a delay, in breach of Article 5(4), in securing her release, in particular because of the two-stage process involving both the Mental Health Tribunal and Parole Board. She accepted the government's offer of £2,500 in settlement of her claim.

External links

HUDOC website (full text)

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: No Bailii link (neutral citation is unknown or not applicable)

Subject(s):

Deprivation of liberty🔍

Date: 6/6/19🔍

Court: European Court of Human Rights🔍

Judicial history:

Judge(s):

Ales Pejchal🔍
Tim Eicke🔍
Raffaele Sabato🔍

Parties:

LV🔍
United Kingdom🔍

Citation number(s):

[2019] MHLO 32 (ECHR)

What links here:

Published: 17/6/19 13:00

Cached: 2025-04-26 22:02:54

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 |Judicial history first case=R (LV) v SSJ (2012) EWHC 3899 (Admin)
 |Sentence=MHT/Parole Board delay
-|Summary=''LV, a [[s47/49]] patient, had argued that there had been a delay, in breach of [[Article 5]](4), in securing her release, in particular because of the two-stage process involving both the Mental Health Tribunal and [[Parole Board]]. She accepted the government's offer of £2,500 in settlement of her claim.''
+|Summary=LV, a [[s47/49]] patient, had argued that there had been a delay, in breach of [[Article 5]](4), in securing her release, in particular because of the two-stage process involving both the Mental Health Tribunal and [[Parole Board]]. She accepted the government's offer of £2,500 in settlement of her claim.
 |External links=*[http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-193837 HUDOC website] (full text)
 |Subject=Deprivation of liberty