| Applicant name |
Hilton
|
| Applicant type |
Natural person (prisoner)
|
| Country |
The United Kingdom
|
| Decision no. |
5613/72
|
| Date |
05/03/1976
|
| Judges |
–
|
| Institution |
Commission
|
| Type |
Decision
|
| Outcome Art. 8 |
Admissible
|
| Reason |
–
|
| Type of privacy |
Procedural privacy; informational privacy
|
| Keywords |
Prisoner’s correspondence
|
| Facts of the case |
Prisoner complains of maltreatment on several aspects, such as degrading treatment, being denied legal assistance and interference with his correspondence.
|
| Analysis |
The Commission stresses that the complaints merrit substantial assessment by the Court and declares the claims admissible. Two small points are worth mentioning. First, the Commission finds that although the applicant might not have exhausted all domestic remedies, he was absolved from doing so, because they would not have been effective (given that the previous proceedings he had instituted all were fruitless). Second, the applicant complains that he was not able to contact legal aid. The Commission deals with this matter nog only under Article 6 ECHR, the right to a fair trial, but also under Article 8 ECHR, the right to correspondence.
|
| Documents |
Decision
|