Summary
The Plenum Resolution explains judicial practice in civil cases concerning involuntary admission to a psychiatric hospital and extension of that admission. The official act also covers comparable proceedings involving specialised tuberculosis facilities. For psychiatric cases, judicial authorisation is tied to the grounds stated in the Law on Psychiatric Care: inpatient assessment or treatment must be necessary, the mental disorder must be severe, and the condition must create an immediate danger, helplessness, or a substantial risk of harm to health if care is withheld.
The application is handled as a special proceeding by the court at the location of the psychiatric institution. It must identify the statutory ground and include a reasoned opinion from a commission of psychiatrists supporting admission or continued hospital stay. The Resolution explains the review period and participation of the patient’s legal representative, a psychiatrist from the commission, the prosecutor and a representative of the institution. The person may appoint a representative of their choice, while minors and persons declared legally incapable are represented as provided by law. Hearings are closed, and the decision may be challenged by the identified participants.
For clinicians, the Resolution is especially relevant to the quality of clinical reasoning and procedural documentation. A commission opinion should present concrete facts showing why inpatient care is required and which legal criterion is met, rather than relying on diagnosis alone. It also clarifies the roles of the psychiatrist, commission, hospital administration and patient representative, and the importance of deadlines and judicial review. Exact procedural references should be checked on the official LexUZ page.