Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)66[1]
Exécution de l’arrêt de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme
A.D et O.D contre le Royaume-Uni
Le Comité des Ministres, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales, qui prévoit qu’il surveille l’exécution des arrêts définitifs de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (ci-après nommées « la Convention » et « la Cour »)[2],
Vu l’arrêt ci-dessous, qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité une fois qu’il est devenu définitif ;
Nom de l’affaire (réf. requête)
Arrêt du
Définitif le
A.D et O.D (28680/06)
16/03/2010
16/06/2010
Rappelant que les constats de violation faits par la Cour exigent, outre le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée dans les arrêts, l’adoption par l’Etat défendeur, si nécessaire, de mesures individuelles mettant fin aux violations et effaçant autant que possible les conséquences de celles-ci pour le requérant, et de mesures générales permettant de prévenir des violations semblables ;
Ayant invité les autorités de l’Etat défendeur à fournir un plan d’action concernant les mesures proposées pour exécuter l’arrêt ;
Ayant examiné, conformément aux Règles du Comité pour l’application de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention, le bilan d’action fourni par le gouvernement (voir bilan d’action, document DH-DD(2012)218E)[3] ;
Ayant noté que l’Etat défendeur a versé à la partie requérante la satisfaction équitable prévue dans l’arrêt ;
DECLARE qu’il a rempli ses fonctions en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention dans cette affaire et
DECIDE d’en clore l’examen.
Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Action Report
AD and OD v the United Kingdom (application no. 28680/06; judgment final on 16/03/2010)
Information submitted by the United Kingdom Government on 2 November 2011
Case Summary
1.Case description:
- The case concerns the violation of the right of the applicants (a mother and son) to respect for their family and private life (violation of Article 8) on account of their treatment by local authority social services, in that:
- they were relocated to a family assessment centre without the correct assessment being carried out during their stay at the centre;
- the second applicant was placed in foster care due to the lack of a correct assessment; and
- there was an unreasonable delay in returning the second applicant to his family once the correct assessment had been made
(The care proceedings commenced in 1997 and the subsequent negligence proceedings against the local authority concluded in 2003.)
- The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 8 in relation to both applicants and Article 13 combined with Article 8 in relation to the first applicant only.
Individual Measures
2.Just satisfaction:
- The just satisfaction award has been paid; evidence previously submitted.
3.Individual measures:
- The Government considers no further individual measures are required beyond the payment of just satisfaction because the case concerned the decisions of professionals made on the particular facts of the case and information available to them at the time. The Children Act 1989 and guidance requires the local authority to take action if they suspect that a child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. The second applicant was subsequently returned to his family and so there was no on-going breach. As noted below statutory guidance in relation to child protection and care planning has been recently revised.
General Measures
4.General measures – Article 8:
- The Government has taken the following general measures:
- There are a number of publications that deal with the issues highlighted in this case. Revised statutory guidance ‘Working Together to Safeguard Children’ was issued in both 2006 and 2010. Chapter 5 of the guidance (managing individual cases) provides advice on what should happen if somebody has concerns about the welfare of a child and in particular, has concerns that a child may be suffering, or is at risk of suffering harm. It sets out the assessment processes to be followed when there are such concerns and emphasises the importance of evidence based decisions being taken by the local authority to safeguard and promote a child’s welfare.
The publication can be viewed at:
- Chapter 3 (care and supervision orders) of the revised Volume I of The Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations on Court Orders revised and published in 2008 sets out the process which should be followed before and after care proceedings under section 31 of that Act. Paragraphs 3.49 – 3.52 focus on the power of the Court to give any directions it considers appropriate about medical or psychiatric examination or other necessary assessment of a child when an interim order is made. The purpose of these assessments is to provide the court with the information required to make its decisions.
The publication can be viewed at:
- Since 2002 residential family centres (defined in section 4(2) of the Care Standards Act 2000 as establishments which provides accommodation for children and their parents at which the parents’ capacity to respond to the children’s needs and to safeguard their welfare is monitored or assessed and at which the parents are given such advice, guidance or counselling as is considered necessary) must be registered and inspected under the provisions of that Act.
5.General Measures – Article 13
The Government considers it is unnecessary to take further steps to disseminate the judgment because the events in question in these cases pre-date the coming into force of the Human Rights Act 1998: claims in relation to events of a similar nature which occurred after 1 October 2000 can be brought in the UK under this Act
6.Publication & Dissemination:
The case has been reported by a range of publishers of law reports in hard copy and online, for example:
It is also reported at [2010] ECHR 340, [2010] 2 FLR 1, [2010] Fam Law 580
7.State of execution of judgment:
- The Government considers that all necessary measures have been taken and the case should be closed
[1] Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 8 mars 2012 lors de la 1136e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.
[2] voir aussi les recommandations adoptées par le Comité des Ministres dans le cadre de la supervision des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, et en particulier la Recommandation Rec(2004)6 du Comité des Ministres aux Etats membres sur l'amélioration des recours internes.
[3] Document en anglais uniquement
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy