EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
SECOND CHAMBER
Application No. 16212/90
James RITCHIE
against
the UNITED KINGDOM
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
(adopted on 13 February 1992)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1
PART I: STATEMENT OF THE FACTS ......................... 2
PART II: SOLUTION REACHED ............................... 3
INTRODUCTION
1. This Report relates to the application introduced under Article
25 of the European Convention on Human Rights by James RITCHIE against
the United Kingdom on 3 April 1989. It was registered on 26 February
1990 under file No. 16212/90.
The applicant was represented before the Commission by Messrs.
Ian McCarry, solicitors, of Glasgow. The respondent Government were
represented by their Agent, Mrs. Audrey Glover of the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office.
2. On 17 April 1991 the European Commission of Human Rights declared
the application partially admissible insofar as it concerned his
complaint that he was refused legal aid for his appeal against
conviction. It then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28
para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:
"In the event of the Commission accepting a petition
referred to it:
a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts,
undertake together with the representatives of the
parties an examination of the petition and, if need
be, an investigation, for the effective conduct of
which the States concerned shall furnish all necessary
facilities, after an exchange of views with the
Commission;
b. it shall at the same time place itself at the
disposal of the parties concerned with a view to
securing a friendly settlement of the matter on the
basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in this
Convention."
3. The Commission (Second Chamber) found that the parties had
reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 13 February 1992
adopted this Report which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the
Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the
solution reached.
4. The following members were present when the Report was adopted:
MM. S. TRECHSEL, President of the Second Chamber
G. JÖRUNDSSON
A. WEITZEL
J.-C. SOYER
H. G. SCHERMERS
H. DANELIUS
Mrs. G. H. THUNE
MM. F. MARTINEZ
L. LOUCAIDES
J.-C. GEUS
A. V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO
PART I
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
5. The applicant is a British citizen born on 7 January 1960 and is
currently detained at Shotts Prison, serving a life sentence. On
19 December 1985, the applicant had been convicted of six charges,
inter alia, of rape and indecent assault. The applicant's solicitor
drafted grounds of appeal against conviction and sentence and the
applicant applied for legal aid for representation at his appeal. The
Scottish Legal Aid Board refused legal aid on the ground that the
grounds of appeal were not substantial. The applicant's appeal was
heard on 29 September 1989 and he appeared unrepresented. The appeal
was dismissed.
6. The applicant complained to the Commission under Article 6 para.
3 (c) of the Convention that he did not receive legal aid for his
appeal though the interests of justice required it. He also complained
under Article 6 of the Convention that his counsel had insufficient
time to prepare for the trial, of the behavour of his lawyer and that
his sentence was excessive.
7. On 17 April 1991, the Commission declared admissible the
applicant's complaint under Article 6 para. 3 (c) and rejected his
remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention.
PART II
SOLUTION REACHED
8. Following its decision on the admissibility of the application,
the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view
to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28 para.
1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals
they wished to make.
9. In accordance with the usual practice, the Secretary, acting on
the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the
possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.
10. Between April and October 1991 there were negotiations between
the parties concerning a friendly settlement of the case. By letter
dated 21 June 1991 the Government informed the Commission of the
Practice Note which had been circulated to the appeal courts concerning
legal aid:
"PRACTICE NOTE
TO ALL APPEAL COURT CHAIRMEN AND CLERKS
In any appeal where legal aid has been refused and the
court considers that, prima facie, an appellant may have
substantial grounds for taking the appeal and it is in the
interests of justice that the appellant should have legal
representation in arguing these grounds, the court shall
forthwith adjourn the hearing and make a recommendation
that the decision to refuse legal aid should be reviewed.
4 December 1990
LORD JUSTICE GENERAL"
11. By letter dated 26 July 1991 the Government referred to the above
practice note and offered to make an ex gratia payment to the applicant
of £900 as to damages and to pay the costs which the applicant has
actually and necessarily incurred and which are reasonable as to
quantum. By letter dated 7 October 1991, the applicant accepted this
offer.
12. At its session on 13 February 1992 the Commission found that the
parties had reached agreement regarding the terms of a settlement. It
further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the
Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured
on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.
13. For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.
Secretary to the Second Chamber President of the Second Chamber
(K. ROGGE) (S. TRECHSEL)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy