Search
document

Document text Analytics

OLSEN v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 13905/88 • ECHR ID: 001-695

Document date: July 13, 1990

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

OLSEN v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 13905/88 • ECHR ID: 001-695

Document date: July 13, 1990

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 13905/88

by Per Werner OLSEN

against Sweden

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 13 July 1990, the following members being present:

MM. J.A. FROWEIN, Acting President

S. TRECHSEL

F. ERMACORA

G. SPERDUTI

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G. H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 22 March 1988

by Per Werner OLSEN against Sweden and registered on 2 June 1988 under

file No. 13905/88;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the

Rules of Procedure of the Commission;

Having regard to the Government's written observations of

14 November 1989 and 18 May 1990;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be

summarised as follows:

The applicant is a Swedish citizen, born in 1948 and residing

in Kristinehamn.

On 17 December 1985 the applicant started corresponding with a

Polish woman living in Poland. He went to Poland to visit her on

21 December 1986 and stayed with her for a couple of weeks. She then

visited the applicant for a month in Sweden in April-May 1987. The

applicant went to Poland again on 19 June 1987 and on 3 July 1987 he

married the woman. He stayed for another week in Poland and then went

back to Sweden.

On 16 September 1987 the applicant's wife obtained an exit

visa in Poland. She made a request for a Swedish visa and residence

permit, so that she could join the applicant in Sweden together with

her daughter. Her request was rejected by the Swedish Immigration

Board (statens invandrarverk) on 26 November 1987 on the ground that

her relationship with the applicant was not sufficiently established.

In a letter to the Board of 17 December 1987 the applicant

complained about the decision. By a letter of 11 February 1988 the

Immigration Board answered the applicant that no appeal lay against its

refusal of a residence permit and that his letter would not lead to a

re-examination of the case. The Board indicated that its decision was

based on the length of the applicant's relationship with his wife and

on how long they had lived together. The Board had also assessed how

stable the relationship between the applicant and his wife was in other

respects. This assessment was based on their own statements. The Board

informed the applicant that his wife could make a new request for a

residence permit at a later date.

On 2 June 1988 the applicant's wife was granted a permit to

stay in Sweden from 2 June 1988 to 2 December 1988. This permit was

prolonged on 29 November 1989 and on 29 May 1989.

On 25 April 1990 the applicant's wife was granted a permanent

residence permit in Sweden.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complained of an interference with his right to

found a family. He maintained that the refusal to let his wife come to

Sweden reduced their possibilities to have children as they are both

over 40 years old. He invoked Article 12 of the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 22 March 1988 and registered

on 2 June 1988.

On 12 July 1989 the Commission decided to communicate the

application to the respondent Government and invite them to submit

written observations on the admissibility and merits of the

application.

The Government's observations were received by letter dated

14 November 1989.

The applicant was invited to submit, before 8 January 1990, any

written observations in reply. No reply was received. Two further

letters to the applicant dated 1 February and 16 March 1990 remained

unanswered.

On 18 May 1990 the Government informed the Commission that the

applicant's wife had received a permanent residence permit in Sweden on

25 April 1990.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicant's wife has now received

a permanent residence permit in Sweden and that the applicant has not

replied to communications from the Commission's Secretary. In these

circumstances the Commission finds that the applicant does not intend

to pursue his application before the Commission within the meaning of

Article 30 para. 1 (a) of the Convention.

It further considers that the respect for Human Rights as

defined in the Convention does not require that the Commission

continue its examination.

It follows that the application should be struck off the list

of cases pursuant to Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES

Secretary to the Commission Acting President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (J.A. FROWEIN)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant