Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

RITCHIE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 16212/90 • ECHR ID: 001-45507

Document date: February 13, 1992

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

RITCHIE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 16212/90 • ECHR ID: 001-45507

Document date: February 13, 1992

Cited paragraphs only



                  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)

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846