FOURTH SECTION   FINAL DECISION   AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF   Application no. 33379/96 by Edgar KLEIN against Germany     The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section) sitting

s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 36356/22 Waldemar Slawomir KNIHINICKI against Norway The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting

The applicant asked to be able to wear a suit and handcuffs. He also requested that the escorting officers should wear plain clothes.

In its decision, the Court of Appeal did not admit an appeal on points of law ( weitere Beschwerde ).

The applicant was not permitted to attend the hearing since he refused to wear clothes. 84 .

    Section 30(1) of the Traffic Act ( Liiklusseadus ) provides that, in a vehicle equipped with seat belts, a passenger must wear a seat belt properly. 2.

inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 2029/06 Martin MAIR against Austria The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting

The decision became final on 26 April 2010 when the High Court, sitting as a nine-judge bench, upheld it. 19.

Wenzel, of the Federal Ministry for Justice and Consumer Protection; the parties’ observations; the comments submitted by the European Centre for Law and Justice, who was granted leave to intervene by

She said that she had taken the decision to wear the full-face veil when she was sixteen years old. She explained that her choice had been accepted by her family and friends and by her husband.

He moreover complained that he had been handcuffed and had to wear prison clothes throughout the funeral ceremony. 13.

Ms Chaplin insisted that the cross was a religious symbol and sought approval to wear it.

    FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 27877/21 Tomáš LÖRINC against Slovakia and 16 other applications (see list appended)   The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting

    On 19 November 1996 the applicant filed a sixth visa request for the purpose of visiting a relative.

In each facility the applicant received adequate clothing and was allowed to wear his own shoes and some other garments. 10 .

xa0;         Application No. 35208/97                  by ZENTRALRAT DEUTSCHER SINTI

The regulations also provided that female members of staff and students should not wear veils in educational institutions. 34.

Poland, The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:   András Sajó, President,   Vincent A.

She was thus content not to wear the niqab in public places at all times but wished to be able to wear it when she chose to do so, depending in particular on her spiritual feelings.

#xa0;             against the Netherlands          The European Commission of Human Rights (Second Chamber) sitting