Schmidt And Dahlstrom v Sweden: ECHR 6 Feb 1976

ECHR No violation of Art. 11; No violation of Art. 14+11
5589/72, (1976) 1 EHRR 632, [1976] ECHR 1
Worldlii, Bailii
Cited by:
CitedDouglas v North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council CA 19-Dec-2003
The applicant had sought a student loan to support his studies as a mature student. It was refused because he would be over 55 at the date of the commencement of the course. He claimed this was discriminatory.
Held: The Convention required the . .
CitedThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Mar-2014
The claimant said that it had been wrongfully deprived of relief from business rates for its two temples. It asserted that it was a religion, and that the treatment was discriminatory. The government said that the refusal was on the basis alone that . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 January 2021; Ref: scu.164861