CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 2 juillet 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } Communicated on 2 July 2019   THIRD SECTION Application no. 28131/19 Y.S. against Russia lodged on 14 May 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s placement in a psychiatric facility for involuntary treatment (Article 5 § 1 of the Convention). The placement was ordered by the Megionskiy Town Court of Khanty-Mansy Autonomous Region on 17 October 2017. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Having regard to the well-established principles under Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention, was the applicant’s mental disorder of a kind or degree warranting compulsory confinement (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands , 24   October 1979, § 39, Series A no. 33)?