Resolution ResDH(2003)9
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 30 October 2001 (final on 30 January 2002)
in the case of Devlin against the United Kingdom
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 24 February 2003
at the 827th 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 Devlin case delivered on 30 October 2001 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. 29545/95) against the United-Kingdom, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 30 November 1995 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Francis William Devlin, an Irish national, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaints concerning the circumstances in which his application for a post in the Northern Ireland Civil Service had been rejected and of a disproportionate restriction on his right of access to a court due to the issue in 1993 of a certificate by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which certified that the refusal of employment to the applicant was an act “done for the purpose of safeguarding national security and of protecting public safety” and which had the nature of conclusive evidence preventing any judicial scrutiny of these facts and the determination on the merits of the applicant’s complaints;
Whereas in its judgment of 30 October 2001 the Court unanimously:
- held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
- held that it was not necessary to examine further the complaints made under Articles 8, 9, 10, 13 or 14 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 non-pecuniary damage and 12 000 pounds sterling in respect of costs and expenses, inclusive of 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 30 October 2001, having regard to the 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 Tinnelly case) which provides, under Rule 7 of the Tribunal Rule, right of judicial appeal against such certificates and that, in the light of the circumstances of the case, no individual measures were required;
Having satisfied itself that on 16 April 2002, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 30 October 2001,
Declares, after having taken note of 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