Resolution ResDH(2004)9
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 19 March 2002 (final on 19 June 2002)
in the case of Devenney against the United Kingdom
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 24 February 2004
at the 871st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Devenney case delivered on 19 March 2002 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 24265/94) against the United Kingdom, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 12 April 1994 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Liam Devenney, an Irish national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint that the issue by the Secretary of State of a certificate under Section 42 of the Fair Employment (Northern Ireland) Act 1976 constituted a disproportionate restriction of his right of access to a court, as the certificate was an irrefutable proof of his discharge from employment on national security and public order grounds and thus not contestable before a court;
Whereas in its judgment of 19 March 2002 the Court unanimously:
- held that it was not necessary to examine further the complaints made under Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention;
- held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
- held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months from the date at which the judgment became final, 10 000 pounds sterling in respect of loss of opportunity, 2 500 pounds sterling in respect of costs and expenses, plus any value-added tax which may be chargeable, and that simple interest at an annual rate of 7,5% would be payable on those sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
- dismissed the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 19 March 2002, having regard to United Kingdom’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new violations of the same kind as that found in this case, notably through the entry into force on 29 July 1999 of the Northern Ireland Act (Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 1999), (see Resolution DH(2000)49 in the case of Tinnelly and Sons Ltd and others against the United Kingdom) which provides, under Rule 7 of the Tribunal Rule, the right of judicial appeal against such certificates and that, in the light of the circumstances of the case, no individual measures was required;
Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 19 March 2002,
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy