Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)137[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
M.G. against the United Kingdom
(Application No. 39393/98, judgment of 24 September 2002, final on 24 December 2002)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);
Having regard to the judgment in this case, transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the local authorities’ failure to fulfil their positive obligation to protect the applicant’s private and family life in that they failed to grant him full access, between April 1995 and March 2000, to his social service records relating to the time he spent as a child in the care of the local authority (violation of Article 8) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;
Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:
- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix) and considering the decision taken at the 854th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (20 October 2003), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination of this case.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)137
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
M.G. against the United Kingdom
Introductory case summary
The case concerns the local authorities’ failure to fulfil their positive obligation to protect the applicant’s private and family life in that they failed to grant him full access, between April 1995 and March 2000, to the social service records relating to the time he spent as a child in the care of the local authority. The legislation regulating the right of access to personal data (see below for details, under “general measures”) did not apply retroactively to records created before its entry into force in 1989 (violation of Article 8).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
4,000 EUR
-
4,000 EUR
Paid on 13/03/2003
b) Individual measures
The European Court noted that from 1 March 2000 (date of entry into force of the Data Protection Act 1998) the applicant might have, but has not, appealed to an independent authority against the non-disclosure of certain records on grounds of confidentiality to third parties (§22 and §31 of the judgment).
The European Court acknowledged nonetheless that the applicant might have suffered some emotional distress and anxiety by reason of his limited access to the relevant records in 1995 and as a result of the absence of a statutory right of access to those records, of a clear indication of the grounds upon which he could request access and of any appeal procedure. Accordingly, the European Court awarded the applicant, on an equitable basis, just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
II.General measures
The measures adopted to ensure access to personal data are detailed in Resolution ResDH(2000)106 adopted in the case of Gaskin against United Kingdom (application No. 10454/83, judgment of 7/07/1989), to which this case is similar (see also §§18-22 of the M.G. judgment).
In particular, the Data Protection Act 1998, which entered into force on 1 March 2000, repealed the provisions prohibiting access to records created before 1 April 1989. The new law provided a statutory right of access for a “data subject” to his/her personal files (both manual and electronic), including those regarding his/her care records, regardless of the date when the information was recorded. Furthermore, the law introduced a right of appeal to the domestic courts or to the Data Protection Commissioner if access were refused, or where a contributor or a relevant third party had not consented.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent similar violations and that the United Kingdom has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 September 2010 at the 1092nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy