Objectives:
The purpose of this article is to present the authors´ comments on the analysis of the conditions for admitting a person to a psychiatric hospital against their will on the basis of a judgment issued by a guardianship court as part of proceedings initiated at the request of an authorized entity, and the assumptions contained therein are based on applicable normative acts.

Methods:
The method of analyzing the current provisions of medical law was used, and of the social security law were also referred to. The judicature of the courts, in particular the Supreme Court, was collected, presented and considered, which constitute a practical guide in assessing whether or not the conditions for admitting a patient to a psychiatric hospital without their consent have been met.

Results:
Placing a mentally ill person in a psychiatric hospital without their consent, in a situation where the person does not pose a direct threat to their health and life, or to the health and life of third parties, and does not pose a threat to public safety, is quite a specific restriction of the human right to freedom, sanctioned by the state.

Conclusions:
The provision of Article 29 (1) of the Mental Health Act is a special provision, it should be interpreted strictly, without referring to the principles of broad interpretation or analogy, and the supreme directive of the courts' actions should be the requirement that the ruling should be purposeful from the point of view of the good and interest of the person concerned.