CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 15 février 1990

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                          AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF                          Application No. 15499/89                                 by A.M.                       against the United Kingdom             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 15 February 1990, the following members being present:                   MM.   C.A. NØRGAARD, President                      E. BUSUTTIL                      A. WEITZEL                      J.C. SOYER                      H.G. SCHERMERS                      H. DANELIUS                      J. CAMPINOS                 Mrs. G.H. THUNE                 Sir   Basil HALL                 MM.   F. MARTINEZ                      C.L. ROZAKIS                 Mrs. J. LIDDY                 Mr.   L. LOUCAIDES                   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 8 June 1989 by A.M. against the United Kingdom and registered on 12 September 1989 under file No. 15499/89;           Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;           Having deliberated;           Decides as follows:           The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan born in 1938 and resident in Lahore, Pakistan.           He complains to the Commission of his deportation from the United Kingdom on 5 May 1989 where he claims to have lived since 1968 and where he married a British citizen and had three daughters who miss him very much.   However, despite a request for specific documentary evidence of his immigration status in the United Kingdom and his appeals, the only relevant document submitted by the applicant is a notice of refusal of entry dated 4 May 1989 by an Immigration Officer. This was addressed to the applicant and read as follows:           "You hold an entry clearance endorsed 'Multiple Visits',         but I am satisfied that false representations were         employed and material facts were not disclosed for the         purpose of obtaining this clearance.   Furthermore, a         change of circumstances, since it was issued, has removed         the basis of your claim to admission.   The visa is not,         therefore, effective.   I therefore refuse you leave to         enter the United Kingdom."           The applicant has not explained what could have been the basis for this decision.           The applicant invokes Articles 1 and 5 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and Articles 14 and 26 of the Convention.   He claims that his family are suffering enormously because of the separation.           However, the Commission notes that Protocol No. 7 has not been ratified by the United Kingdom Government.   It also observes that the applicant has submitted no evidence of an interference with his property rights, contrary to Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, and no evidence that he has suffered any discrimination in the securement of his Convention rights, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention. Moreover, the Commission finds no substantiation in the case-file of any appearance of a violation of the applicant's other Convention rights or freedoms.   It follows that the application is, as a whole, manifestly ill-founded, within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 of the Convention.           For these reasons, the Commission           DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.        Secretary to the Commission        President of the Commission               (H.C. KRÜGER)                     (C.A. NØRGAARD)