Lexploria

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Application No. 23715/94

S.P., D.P. and A.T.

against

the United Kingdom

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 11 April 1997)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1

PART I: STATEMENT OF THE FACTS ......................... 3

PART II: SOLUTION REACHED ............................... 4

INTRODUCTION

1. This Report relates to the application introduced under

Article 25 of the European Convention on Human Rights by S.P., D.P. and

A.T. against the United Kingdom on 3 September 1993. It was registered

on 18 March 1994 under file No. 23715/94.

The applicant was represented before the Commission by

Mr. Luke Clements, a solicitor practising in Hereford. The respondent

Government were represented by their Agent, Ms. Susan Dickson of the

Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

2. On 20 May 1996, the Commission declared the application

admissible. It then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28

para. 1 of the Convention which provides:

"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 found that the parties had reached a friendly

settlement of the case and on 11 April 1997 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:

Mr. S. TRECHSEL, President

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H. DANELIUS

F. MARTINEZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

M.A. NOWICKI

I. CABRAL BARRETO

B. CONFORTI

I. BÉKÉS

J. MUCHA

D. SVÁBY

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

P. LORENZEN

K. HERNDL

E. BIELIUNAS

E.A. ALKEMA

M. VILA AMIGÓ

Mrs. M. HION

Mr. R. NICOLINI

PART I

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

5. The applicants, two brothers and their half-brother, are British

citizens born in 1983, 1984 and 1988 and are resident in Herefordshire.

The first applicant S.P. and the second applicant D.P. were made

wards of court on 7 July 1986 on grounds, inter alia, that their father

had been involved in abusing another child. S.P and D.P. were placed

with foster parents, Mr. and Mrs. O., where they remained for 15 months

and a strong bond of affection grew up between them and the foster

parents.

On 1 October 1987, the brothers were returned to live with their

mother R. who was living with another man, T. On 8 August 1988, A.T.

(the third applicant) was born, his parents being R. and T. The

relationship between R. and T. was violent. In April 1991, R. sought

refuge with the children in a home for battered women.

Concern arose in the home as to the degree of neglect of the

children. On 3 August 1991 the children were found at night on their

own outside a pub. On 5 August 1991, R. was evicted from the home and

the children taken into care by Hereford and Worcester County Council

("the Council"). They were placed with temporary foster parents.

On 6 November 1991, an interim care and control order was granted

by the High Court to the Council.

The intention of the Council at this time was that the children

should remain in permanent care and be returned to live with Mr. and

Mrs. O., their first foster parents. The children, particularly A.T.,

were however becoming increasingly attached to their current foster

parents as time passed.

On 14 October 1992, the principal provisions of the Children Act

1991 came into force. This had the effect that children who were wards

of court automatically were placed in local authority care and the

wardship discharged. Since the matter concerning the applicants had not

been concluded at this date, the High Court proceeded on 6 October 1992

to de-ward the children on an undertaking by the Council to commence

care proceedings under section 31 of the Children Act 1989.

Mr. Luke Clements was at this stage appointed solicitor to

represent the children in the proceedings. He made several

representations to the Court, expressing his concern that the case was

not progressing and that it was imperative for the welfare of the

children that they move to a permanent placement as soon as possible.

On 8 March 1993, a directions appointment was obtained before a

High Court judge, who accepted that the case had been allowed to drift

along through the fault of the court. He made an interim care order,

which became final on 19 March 1993.

Following the order, the children were placed by the Council with

Mr. and Mrs O., who had maintained contact with them.

6. The applicants complained of the unnecessary delay in the

proceedings, which caused them considerable suffering and uncertainty

as to their future and, in the case of A. T., gave rise to conflicting

attachments. They invoked Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention.

PART II

SOLUTION REACHED

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. Between May 1996 and December 1996 there were discussions between

the parties concerning a friendly settlement of the case.

10. By letter dated 4 December 1996, the applicants accepted the

offer of the Government of 21 November 1996 to settle the case on the

basis of an ex gratia payment to the applicants of £ 3 000, payment of

reasonable legal costs and the Government's confirmation that they are

taking steps to implement the recommendations made by

Dame Margaret Booth DBE in her report investigating the delay in

Children Act cases and reviewing the administrative procedures for

listing cases ("Avoiding Delay in Children Act Cases"), published

July 1996).

11. At its session on 11 April 1997, 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.

12. For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.

H.C. KRÜGER S. TRECHSEL

Secretary President

to the Commission of the Commission

Menu

S.P., D.P. and A.T. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

S.P., D.P. and A.T. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM