CASE OF K.A. v. AUSTRIA - [German Translation] summary by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM)

CASE OF K.A. v. AUSTRIA - [German Translation] summary by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM) Application No: 44001/22, 22881/24

Articles: 35, 35-3-a, 5, 5-1-e, 5-4

Respondent state: AUT

Date: 2026-05-19

Conclusion:

Remainder inadmissible (Art.

35) Admissibility criteria; (Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded; No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1-e - Persons of unsound mind); No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review of lawfulness of detention)

Subject classification: Aigner v. Austria, no. 28328/03, 10 May 2012; Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, §§ 118 47, ECHR 2011; Antoine v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62960/00, 13 May 2003; Cabral v. the Netherlands, no. 37617/10, § 34, 28 August 2018; Claes v. Belgium, no. 43418/09, § 123, 10 January 2013; Constancia v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 73560/12, § 26, 3 March 2015; D.T. v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 25307/10, § 47, 2 April 2013; De Tommaso v. Italy [GC], no. 43395/09, § 143, 23 February 2017; Denis and Irvine v. Belgium [GC], nos. 62819/17 and 63921/17, §§ 134-37, 1 June 2021; Eriksen v. Norway, 27 May 1997, § 76, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-III; Glien v. Germany, no. 7345/12, §§ 83-84, 28 November 2013; Hermi v. Italy [GC], no. 18114/02, §§ 69 72, ECHR 2006-XII; Hodžić v. Croatia, no. 28932/14, §§ 44-53, 4 April 2019; Ilnseher v. Germany [GC], nos. 10211/12 and 27505/14, 4 December 2018; Johnson v. the United Kingdom, 24 October 1997, § 58, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VII; Juncal v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 32357/09, § 30, 17 September 2013; Kadusic v. Switzerland, no. 43977/13, § 43, 9 January 2018; Kamasinski v. Austria, no. 9783/82, § 74, 19 December 1989; Kurt v. Austria [GC], no. 62903/15, §§ 161-90, 15 June 2021; Levchuk v. Ukraine, no. 17496/19, § 79, 3 September 2020; Manzano Diaz v. Belgium, no. 26402/17, § 26, 18 May 2021; Megyeri v. Germany, 12 May 1992, § 22, Series A no. 237 A; Mirilashvili v. Russia, no. 6293/04, § 162, 11 December 2008; Moreira Ferreira v. Portugal (no. 2) [GC], no. 19867/12, § 83, 11 July 2017; N. v. Romania, no. 59152/08, §§ 186 and 187, 28 November 2017; P.W. v. Austria, no. 10425/19, § 65, 21 June 2022; Palchik v. Ukraine, no. 16980/06, § 50, 2 March 2017; Petschulies v. Germany, no. 6281/13, § 78, 2 June 2016; Puttrus v. Germany (dec.), no. 1241/06, 24 March 2009; Reinprecht v. Austria, no. 67175/01, §§ 48 and 55, ECHR 2005-XII; Rooman v. Belgium [GC], no. 18052/11, § 192, 31 January 2019; S.N. v. Sweden, no. 34209/96, § 47, ECHR 2002-V; Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154/10, §§ 102-31, ECHR 2015; Sievert v. Germany, no. 29881/07, §§ 59 and 61, 19 July 2012; Sofri and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 37235/97, ECHR 2003-VIII; Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, ECHR 2012; Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 47, ECHR 2000 X; Vasile Pruteanu and Others v. Romania, no. 9308/18, §§ 63-67, 14 January 2025; Volodina v. Russia, no. 41261/17, §§ 71-72, 9 July 2019; Yüksel Yalçınkaya v. Türkiye [GC], no. 15669/20, § 302, 26 September 2023