AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application No. 25145/94
by R.T.
against the United Kingdom
The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting
in private on 29 November 1995, the following members being present:
Mr. C.L. ROZAKIS, President
Mrs. J. LIDDY
MM. E. BUSUTTIL
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
B. MARXER
B. CONFORTI
N. BRATZA
I. BÉKÉS
E. KONSTANTINOV
G. RESS
A. PERENIC
C. BÎRSAN
K. HERNDL
Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection
of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 10 January 1994
by R.T. against the United Kingdom and registered on 14 September 1994
under file No. 25145/94;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules
of Procedure of the Commission;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The facts of the case, as they have been submitted by the
applicant's representative, may be summarised as follows. The
applicant is a Turkish citizen born in approximately 1976. She was in
the United Kingdom as a refugee between January and March 1992, when
she left. She is now in the safe haven established by the United
Nations in Northern Iraq. She is represented before the Commission by
Mr. N. McQueen, an academic lawyer who lives in London.
On 21 October 1993 the applicant's representative found a letter
of 5 August 1993 addressed to the applicant at the house in which he
now lives. The letter was from local council and required payment of
some £400 by way of community charge. A liability order was
subsequently made. After some initial correspondence with the council,
the council informed the applicant's representative that the house was
registered with the Land Registry as being owned by the applicant and
another person, and that the council intended to "pursue the matter
against [the applicant] until such time as evidence is produced to show
that she no longer has a legal interest in the property ... I do have
a duty to collect the council tax payable and at present there is no
evidence in my possession to suggest this is not the liability of [the
applicant]." The council officer noted that the applicant's
representative had access to the property and asked about his own
interest in the property.
On 21 January 1994, the council again wrote to the applicant's
representative, stating that "the council's bailiffs have returned the
liability order again [the applicant] and my next action can be to
apply to the court for her committal to prison. However, I will
refrain from taking this drastic action until 7 February to give ...
the opportunity to provide the information I requested in my previous
letter."
The applicant's representative states that an attempt to arrest
the applicant was made in August 1994, and that a further summons for
council tax for the years 1993 - 1995 has been issued.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant alleges a violation of Article 6 of the Convention
because the local council is trying the applicant in her absence and
attempting to imprison her.
THE LAW
The applicant alleges a violation of Article 6 (Art. 6) of the
Convention, which provides, so far as relevant, as follows:
"1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or
of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a
fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an
independent and impartial tribunal established by law."
Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention applies to proceedings by
which civil rights and obligations or criminal charges are determined,
the concepts of "civil rights and obligations" and "criminal charge"
being autonomous. The Commission is aware that a person against whom
a liability order for non-payment of the community charge has been made
can be imprisoned if certain conditions have been met (that is, the
conditions set out in the Community Charges (Administration and
Enforcement) Regulations 1989 - see No. 19380/92, Benham v. the United
Kingdom, Comm. Rep. 29.11.94, pending before the European Court of
Human Rights). A liability order sets out the amount of local tax
which is to be paid, and a committal order may only be made if (inter
alia) the debtor has been present in court to be examined.
The Commission further recalls that proceedings to establish
liability to tax determine neither civil rights and obligations nor,
in the absence of a penal aspect, criminal charges (in the civil
context, see No. 11189/84, Dec. 11.12.86, D.R. 50 p. 121, with the
further references at p. 140, and in the criminal context, Eur. Court
H.R., Bendenoun judgment of 24 February 1994, Series A no. 284, pp. 19,
20, paras. 46-48).
In the present case liability orders appear to have been made
against the applicant, but for the time being no committal proceedings
have taken place. Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention does not apply
to the liability proceedings which have been brought.
It follows that the application is incompatible ratione materiae
with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 27
para. 2 (Art. 27-2).
For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,
DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.
Secretary to the First Chamber President of the First Chamber
(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (C.L. ROZAKIS)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy