Applicant name | X. |
Applicant type | Natural person (immigrant) |
Country | Switzerland |
Decision no. | 7031/75 |
Date | 12/07/1976 |
Judges | –
|
Institution | Commission |
Type | Decision |
Outcome Art. 8 | Inadmissible |
Reason | No interference |
Type of privacy | Family privacy |
Keywords | Ratione temporis; Immigrant’s marriage; expulsion |
Facts of the case | German man lives, works and marries in Switzerland. When he loses his job, he is forced to leave Swiss territory. |
Analysis | The case is interesting for a number of reasons:
1. Most matters of the applicant complains of have take place before Switzerland joined the Convention. Still, the Commission believes that it has jurisdiction because the effects of those matters (the fact that he cannot live in Switzerland) continue untill after this period. That means that the Commission feels that in principle, countries should revisit all laws, legal decisions and administrative dealings in place and bring them in conformity with the Convention. It is doubtfull wether this is in line with the original intention of the authors of the Convention. |
Documents | Decision |