Applicant name | X. |
Applicant type | Natural person |
Country | UK |
Decision no. | 7215/75 |
Date | 07/07/1977 |
Judges | – |
Institution | Commission |
Type | Decision |
Outcome Art. 8 | Admissible |
Reason | – |
Type of privacy | Sexual privacy |
Keywords | Homosexual conduct |
Facts of the case | Man is sentenced to jail for homosexual conduct with two 18 year old men. |
Analysis | This is a revolutionary case, not because the Commission makes sweeping statements, but because it disregards the (many) arguments by the government why the case should be declared inadmissible. It finds three things:
1. The law does interfere with the applicant’s private life and it is not a priori clear that such would be deemed necessary in a democratic society for the protection of health. The Court should asses this matter. |
Documents | Decision |