Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)64[1]
Exécution de l’arrêt de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme
Allen 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
Allen (18837/06)
30/03/2010
30/06/2010
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 le bilan d’action, document DH-DD(2012)59E)[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 Plan/Action Report and Updates Template
Case of Allen v The United Kingdom (Application no. 18837/06; judgment final on 30 June 2010) Information submitted by the United Kingdom Government on 13 October 2011
Case Summary
1.Case description:
- The case concerned a violation of the applicant's right to test the lawfulness of her detention before a court, due to the refusal, in October 2005, of a request by her counsel for the applicant to be present at the hearing of an appeal filed by the prosecutor against a previous judicial decision granting her bail.
- The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 5§4.
Individual Measures
2.Just satisfaction:
- The just satisfaction award of €1,000 has been paid, as converted to pounds sterling; evidence previously submitted.
3.Other individual measures:
- The Government considers no further individual measures are required as just satisfaction has been paid. The applicant is no longer held on remand.
General Measures
4.General measures:
- The Government has taken the following general measures:
- England and Wales
An amendment has been made to Criminal Procedure Rule 19(17) which governs the right of the defendant to be present at the hearing of a prosecution appeal to the Crown Court against the grant of bail made in a magistrates’ court. The amendment comes into force on 4 October 2010. See paragraph 8 of the document in this link
The amendment to the Rule has been disseminated to court staff in England and Wales through internal guidance
The amendment to the Rule has been disseminated to Crown Prosecutors in England and Wales through internal guidance
- Scotland
The Scottish Government reports that the following measures have been taken:
On 24 November 2010, the Lord Justice General passed an Act of Adjournal amending the Criminal Procedure Rules to grant the accused an express right to attend Crown bail appeal hearings. The Act of Adjournal (Criminal Procedure Rules Amendment No. 4) (Miscellaneous) 2010 came into force on 13 December 2010.The amendment to the Rules has been disseminated to court staff.
- Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland, the current practice is that defendants are routinely present (often by means of live video link) for the hearing of prosecution appeals against the grant of bail in the High Court. Additionally, a guidance document was issued in June 2010 to all judges with a criminal jurisdiction. That document contains a specific note on the implications of Allen v UK and a link to the full transcript of the judgment. The judgment has also been distributed to prosecutors.
5.Publication:
- The judgment has been publicised in the following locations:
The British and Irish Legal Information Institute website at
The UK Human Rights Blog website at
Criminal Law and Justice Weekly publication at
Blackstone’s Criminal Practice Bulletin (at page 3 of the document) at
6.Dissemination:
- The Government considers it is unnecessary to disseminate the judgment any further.
7.- The Government considers that all necessary measures have been taken and that 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