FOURTH SECTION
FINAL DECISION
AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application no. 63683/00
by Derrick BIRKS
against the United Kingdom
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 24 June 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
Lech Garlicki, President,
Nicolas Bratza,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
Ján Šikuta,
Päivi Hirvelä,
Ledi Bianku, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 31 October 2000,
Having regard to the partial decision of 15 October 2002,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Derrick Birks, was a British national who was born in 1931 and lived in Derbyshire. He was unrepresented before the Court. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C. Whomersley of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant’s wife died on 1 January 1996.
On 3 March 2000 the applicant made a claim for Widow’s Bereavement Tax Allowance (“WBA”) to the Inland Revenue. On 27 October 2000 he was informed that his claim could not be accepted because there was no basis in United Kingdom law allowing widowers to claim this benefit. The applicant did not appeal further as he considered or was advised that such a remedy would be bound to fail since no such social security benefit was payable to widowers under United Kingdom law.
B. Relevant domestic law
The relevant domestic law and practice is described in the Court’s judgment in the case of Hobbs, Richard, Walsh and Geen v. the United Kingdom, nos. 63684/00, 63475/00, 63484/00 and 63468/00, judgment of 26 March 2007.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained that the United Kingdom authorities’ refusal to grant him WBA or equivalent constituted discrimination on grounds of sex contrary to Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.
THE LAW
On 14 December 2006 the Registry requested the applicant to confirm by 22 May 2007 whether a friendly settlement had been reached in the applicant’s case following the decision in Hobbs, Richard, Walsh and Geen v. the United Kingdom (cited above) and if not, to submit his claims under Article 41 of the Convention.
By letter dated 8 March 2007, the applicant’s estate informed the Court that the applicant had died and that his estate no longer wished to pursue the case.
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant’s estate may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the remainder of the application out of its list of cases.
Lawrence EarlyLech Garlicki
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy