HM v Switzerland 39187/98 (2002) ECHR 157: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
{{caselaw-stub}} | {{caselaw-stub}} | ||
see also JE v DE (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor), Surrey County | |||
Council [2006] EWHC 3459 | |||
Revision as of 07:49, 13 April 2008
HM had capacity to object but was undecided; the clinic were entitled to infer consent from the lack of objection. ... HM was admitted to a nursing home because of neglect. He cited neglect was not a ground for deprivation of liberty because the Convention only cites vagrancy as grounds in Article 5 (1)
External links
see also JE v DE (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor), Surrey County Council [2006] EWHC 3459