| Applicant name | X. |
| Applicant type | Natural person (prisoner) |
| Country | The United Kingdom |
| Decision no. | 6564/74 |
| Date | 21/05/1975 |
| Judges | –
|
| Institution | Commission |
| Type | Decision |
| Outcome Art. 8 | Inadmissible |
| Reason | Manifestly ill-founded (public safety; health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others) |
| Type of privacy | Family privacy |
| Keywords | Conjugal visit prisoner; European Consensus; limmitation clause |
| Facts of the case | Prisoner is denied conjugal visits |
| Analysis | The case is interesting for four reasons:
1. The Commission reverses the claim; instead of analysing Article 3 ECHR, which is invoked by applicant, it discusses the matter under Article 8 and 12 ECHR. |
| Documents | Decision |