| Applicant name | X |
| Applicant type | Natural Person (immigrant) |
| Country | Sweden |
| Decision no. | 434/58 |
| Date | 30/06/1959 |
| Judges |
C. Th. EUSTATHIADES P. BERG P. FABER L.J.0. BEAUFORT H. SUSTERHENN S. PETREN G. JANSSEH-PEVTSCHIN M. S. RENSEN M. N. ERIM F. ERMACORA P. MODINOS |
| Institution | Commission (First Chamber) |
| Type | Decision |
| Outcome Art. 8 | Inadmissible |
| Reason | Substantially the same; Exhaustion of domestic remedies |
| Type of privacy | Manifestly ill-founded |
| Keywords | Right to family life; Immigrant; |
| Facts of the case | See description case no. 172/56 |
| Analysis | Most claims are rejected because they are substantially the same as dealt with in the previous case (172/56). The Commission does accept a claim with respect to the father’s access to his son. The question in this case is whether, by the exercise of its right under general international law to refuse an entry permit to the applicant the Swedish government has deprived the applicant his right to a fair hearing of his petition for a right of access to his son (article 6) and his right to respect for his private and family life (article 8). The Commission does not find this complaint to be manifestly ill-founded, but is unable to ascertain from the information offered to it whether all domestic remedies have been exhausted. It therefore declares inadmissible the case, but add at the same time that, if hereafter the applicant should finally exhaust the local remedies available to him and should file a fresh application with the commission, it will be treated as forming of the proceedings in the new application. Therewith, the Commission makes clear that the future application will not be declared inadmissible because it regards substantially the same matter as a case with which it has already dealt. |
| Documents | Decision |