CASE OF Y AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM



     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54

(art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights

and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the

Convention"),

     Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human

Rights in the Y. case delivered on 29 October 1992 and

transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;

     Recalling that the case originated in an application against

the United Kingdom lodged with the European Commission of Human

Rights on 2 September 1986 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the

Convention by Mrs X. and her son Y., British nationals, who

complained of corporal punishment of the applicant Y., then aged

fifteen, in an independent school;

     Recalling that the Commission declared the mother's

complaints inadmissible and the son's admissible and in its

report adopted on 8 October 1991, concluded by eleven votes to

two that there had been a violation of Articles 3 and 13

(art. 3, art. 13) of the Convention, and that no separate issue

arose under Article 8 (art. 8);

     Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the

Commission on 7 December 1991;

     Whereas in its judgment of 29 October 1992 the Court, having

taken formal note of a friendly settlement reached by the

Government of the United Kingdom and the applicant and having

found that there were no reasons of public policy justifying the

continuation of the proceedings, decided unanimously to strike

the case out of its list;

     Whereas under the above-mentioned friendly settlement, it

was agreed that:

-    the government would pay the applicant £ 8 000;

-    the Government of the United Kingdom would pay the

     applicant's costs, namely:

      a. County Court proceedings £ 4 516,38 plus interest;

      b. Solicitors' fees £ 2 750 plus VAT;

      c. Counsel's fees £ 1 000 plus VAT;

      d. Mr Rosenbaum's fees £ 750 plus VAT,

provided that itemised bills were produced and the rate of

interest was indicated so that the amounts claimed could be

looked at by the Treasury Solicitors Costs Branch;

     Recalling that Rule 49, paragraph 3, of the Court's Rules

provides that the striking out of a case shall be effected by

means of a judgment which the President shall forward to the

Committee of Ministers in order to allow it to supervise, in

accordance with Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention, the

execution of any undertakings which may have been attached to the

discontinuance or solution of the matter;

     Having invited the Government of the United Kingdom  to

inform it of the measures taken for the execution of the

undertakings which were attached to the solution of the

matter;

     Having satisfied itself that before 23 September 1992 the

Government of the United Kingdom paid the applicant the sum of

£ 8 000 and that the sums due in respect of costs were paid on

7 October 1992,

     Declares that it has exercised its functions under

Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.

 

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy