FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 30405/02
by John POVEY
against the United Kingdom
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 14 October 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
Lech Garlicki, President,
Nicolas Bratza,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Ledi Bianku,
Mihai Poalelungi, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 August 2002,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr John Povey, is a British national who lives in Northern Ireland. He was represented before the Court by Mr Les Allamby, a lawyer practising in Belfast. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C. Whomersley of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant's wife died on 27 February 2001, leaving no dependent children. His claim for widows' benefits, namely a Widow's Payment (Wpt) and a Widow's Pension (WP) was made on 25 May 2001 and again on 20 June 2001 and was rejected on 26 June 2001 on the ground that he was not entitled to widows' benefits because he was not a woman. This decision was confirmed by an appeal tribunal on 30 April 2002. The applicant did not appeal further as he considered or was advised that such a remedy would be bound to fail since no such social security benefits were payable to widowers under United Kingdom law.
B. Relevant domestic law
The domestic law relevant to this application is set out in Willis v. the United Kingdom, no. 36042/97, §§ 14‑26, ECHR 2002-IV and Runkee and White v. the United Kingdom, no. 42949/98, §§ 40-41, 25 July 2007.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained that British social security legislation discriminated against him on grounds of sex, in breach of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with both Article 8 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
THE LAW
By a letter of 2 September 2008 the applicant's representative notified the Court that Mr Povey had been offered GBP 1,000 in respect of his claim for WPt plus costs and interest as part of a consolidated settlement, and that he had accepted and received payment. In relation to the only outstanding claim regarding WP, the applicant's representative also informed the Court that the applicant had no further interest in pursuing the complaint which had already been decided by the Court in the case of Runkee and White (cited above). On 24 September 2008 the Registry of the Court informed the parties that the Court would consider striking the whole application out of its list of cases following the settlement reached and the request for withdrawal of the claim regarding WP.
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties in respect of WPt. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court).
Moreover, in the light of the above and in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court notes that the applicant does not intend to pursue his complaint regarding WP. Furthermore, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols which require the continuation of the examination of the complaint.
Accordingly, the application as a whole should be struck out of the Court's list of cases.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Lawrence EarlyLech Garlicki
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy