| Applicant name |
X.
|
| Applicant type |
Natural Person
|
| Country |
Austria and Germany (two countries)
|
| Decision no. |
3479/68
|
| Date |
3479/68
|
| Judges |
–
|
| Institution |
Commission (Plenary)
|
| Type |
Decision
|
| Outcome Art. 8 |
Inadmissible
|
| Reason |
Substantially the same; manifestly ill-founded
|
| Type of privacy |
Bodily Privacy
|
| Keywords |
Incoherent
|
| Facts of the case |
Incoherent claim by a man who appears to have jumped from a train of pushed or not and feels that others are responsible.
|
| Analysis |
Commission stresses first that the person has submitted various applications about the same manner before the Commission, all of which have been rejected. This claim is substantially the same and hence must be rejected.
In so far as new facts/claims arise, the Commission stresses that the man tries to deceive it by making factually incorrect and conflicting statements. It concludes that the man is abusing his right to petition.
|
| Documents |
Decision
|