Institutions for persons with disabilities in small, closed residential groups. There was doubt that these persons could move in the public area without being a risk to themselves or others. The staff that performs care close to the body for clients with multiple disabilities should also be protected from an increased risk that could have brought the existing care system to its knees. On the other hand, it was already clear in spring 2020 that staying and meeting outside supported by other precautionary measures such as social distancing and wearing a mask bears a lower risk of infection than larger groups of persons staying inside only. A number of institutions decided to take the drastic step of minimising the risk of infection by imposing curfews. Residents were not allowed to leave the buildings during the lockdown. Visits from families or friends were not possible. Freedom of persons with disabilities restricted in particular This extreme situation could be alleviated in institutions with gardens that were available for outdoor exercise. Other institutions allowed accompanied walks outdoors. However, this was not always the case. Decision-makers overlooked in many cases that they bore the responsibility for the safety of the clients, but not only the general lockdown regulations had to be observed. The (constitutional) legal provisions under which measures that restrict freedom are allowed to be set still apply during a pandemic. Legal requirements not fulfilled Restrictions of freedom against the will of those affected are only permissible in the constitutionally defined exceptions and only on the basis of a legal authorisation (see Klaushofer et al., “Ausgewählte unionsund verfassungsrechtliche Fragen der österreichischen Maßnahmen zur Eindämmung der Ausbreitung des Covid-19-Virus”, 2020, in Zeitschrift für Öffentliches Recht, volume 75, p. 118). For the justification of curfews during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Nursing and Residential Homes Residence Act (Heimaufenthaltsgesetz), the Epidemics Act (Epidemiegesetz) and at most the COVID-19 Measures Act (COVID-19Maßnahmengesetz) can be considered. The above-mentioned guidelines are executed by the administrative authorities. If there are no such official guidelines (by decree or regulation), there is no basis for a measure that deprives liberty. The application of the Nursing and Residential Homes Residence Act on the other hand can only be considered for persons with mental disabilities or mental illness. According to this Act, a curfew could only be justified if the affected person is at risk of harming themselves or someone else and there are no other milder, expedient alternatives available. But even if these conditions were fulfilled – which is doubtful in most of the cases where curfews were imposed – a procedure shall be complied with: the measures shall be reported to the representative(s) of the residents without delay. If this does not happen, they are illegal for this reason alone. Legal basis for measures that restrict freedom is requirement Forbidding persons from leaving their place of residence or making it impossible for them to do so constitutes a measure that restricts freedom and can only be 88