Главная страницаZaki.ru законы и право Поиск законов поиск по сайту Каталог документов каталог документов Добавить в избранное добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное




Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 22.04.2010 «Дело Бик (Bik) против России» [англ.]







EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF BIK v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 26321/03)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 22.IV.2010)

--------------------------------
<*> This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Bik v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic} <*>,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 25 March 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 26321/03) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by a Russian national, Mr Aleksandr Yefimovich Bik ("the applicant"), on 5 August 2003.
2. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Ms V. Milinchuk, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, Mr A. Savenkov, First Deputy Minister of Justice of the Russian Federation, and subsequently by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that his committal to a psychiatric hospital against his will had been unlawful.
4. On 19 June 2008 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).
5. The Government objected to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the application. The Court examined and dismissed their objection.

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

6. The applicant was born in 1972 and lives in Moscow.
7. On 27 May 2002 the applicant's mother requested Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic No. 21 (Психоневрологический диспансер N 21) (the "Clinic") to examine her son, expressing concern about a change in his behaviour. He was afraid to leave the flat where he lived, had cut out all social contacts and was frightened by noises or the sound of the telephone ringing.
8. The applicant refused to be examined by the doctors at the Clinic and on 29 May 2002 Dr N., a psychiatrist from the Clinic, applied for a court order authorising the applicant's psychiatric assessment without his consent. She noted, on the basis of the information submitted by the applicant's mother, that the applicant might be suffering from a severe mental disorder that impaired his ability to meet the ordinary demands of life, and that his condition might deteriorate should he be left without psychiatric treatment.
9. On 31 May 2002 the Cheremushkinskiy District Court of Moscow authorised the psychiatric assessment. According to the applicant, he was informed of that decision at a later date.
10. On 5 June 2002 Dr N. examined the applicant at his home. The applicant's mother was present. The applicant was agitated, he shouted at the doctor and his mother and threatened them. He refused to talk and made them both leave. Dr N. concluded that the appl



> 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.2083 СЃ