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 judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
in the case of "Young, James and Webster", delivered on 13 August 1981
and 18 October 1982, and transmitted the same days to the Committee of
Ministers;
Recalling that the case had its origins in two applications against
the United Kingdom lodged with the European Commission of Human
Rights, under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention, by three United
Kingdom citizens, Mr Ian McLean Young, Mr Noël Henry James and
Mr Ronald Roger Webster, complaining that the enforcement of the 1974
Act, as amended, allowing their dismissal when they objected on
reasonable grounds to joining a trade union, interfered with their
freedom of thought and conscience, freedom of expression, freedom of
association with others and that no adequate remedies had been
available to them;
Recalling that the case had been brought before the Court by the
European Commission of Human Rights;
Whereas in its judgment of 13 August 1981, the Court:
- holds by eighteen votes to three that there has been a breach
of Article 11 (art. 11) of the Convention;
- holds unanimously that it is not necessary also to examine the
case under Articles 9 or 10 (art. 9, art. 10);
- holds unanimously that it is also not necessary to determine
whether there has been a violation of Article 13 (art. 13);
- holds unanimously that the question of the application of
Article 50 (art. 50) is not ready for decision;
Whereas in its judgment of 18 October 1982 the Court unanimously:
- holds that the United Kingdom is to pay:
(a) in respect of pecuniary losses and non-pecuniary loss
- to Mr Young, the sum of eighteen thousand six hundred and
twenty-six pounds sterling (£ 18 626),
- to Mr James, the sum of forty-six thousand two hundred and
fifteen pounds sterling (£ 46 215),
- to Mr Webster, the sum of ten thousand and seventy-six pounds
sterling (£ 10 076),
- together in each case with the additional interest referred to
in paragraph 17 of the judgment;
(b) to the three applicants together, in respect of legal costs
and expenses referable to the proceedings before the Commission and
the Court, the total sum of sixty-five thousand pounds sterling
(£ 65 000) less thirty-five thousand seven hundred and
sixty-four French francs (35 764 FF);
- rejects the remainder of the claims for just satisfaction;
Having regard to the the "Rules concerning the application of
Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention";
Having invited the Government of the United Kingdom to inform it of
the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgments,
having regard to its obligations under Article 53 (art. 53) of the
Convention to abide by the judgments;
Whereas, during the examination of this case by the Committee of
Ministers, the Government of the United Kingdom informed the Committee
of Ministers of the measures taken in consequence of the judgments,
which information is summarised in the appendix to this resolution;
Having satisfied itself that the Government of the United Kingdom has
awarded the just satisfaction provided for in the judgment of the
Court of 18 October 1982,
Declares, after taking note of the information supplied by the
Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its function
under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (83) 3
Information provided by the Government of the United Kingdom during
the examination of the "Young, James and Webster" case before the
Committee of Ministers
Following the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 18 October 1982, the Government paid to the applicants, where
appropriate through their legal representatives, the amounts awarded
by the European Court for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss for legal
costs. These sums were paid on 22 and 27 October 1982 respectively.
In relation to the judgment of the European Court of 13 August 1981,
the provisions of the Employment Act 1982 relating to the closed shop
now provide that the dismissal of an employee from employment in
circumstances similar to those under which Mr James, Mr Young and
Mr Webster were dismissed is to be regarded as an unfair dismissal.
An employee dismissed in these circumstances is therefore now entitled
to a remedy under British law. These provisions first took effect on
15 August 1980 as a result of the coming into force of the Employment
Act 1980. The relevant provisions have been re-enacted and
strengthened by provisions of the Employment Act 1982 which came into
force on 1 December 1982.