Lexploria

Application No. 10978/84

MARY CATHERINE STOUTT

against

IRELAND

(adopted on 17 December 1987)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION 2 - 3

Part I: STATEMENT OF THE FACTS 4

Part II: SOLUTION REACHED 5 - 6

INTRODUCTION

1. This Report relates to Application No. 10978/84 introduced by

Mary Catherine Stoutt against Ireland on 30 May 1984 under Article 25

of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms. The application was registered on 4 June 1984.

2. The applicant was represented before the Commission by

Senator M. Robinson, S.C., Mr. E. Stewart S.C., and Mr. K. O'Brien of

Bowler Geraghty and Company, solicitors, Dublin.

3. The Government were represented before the Commission by

successive agents, initially Mrs. J. Liddy, then Department of Foreign

Affairs, Dublin, and subsequently, Mr. P. Smyth, also of the

Department of Foreign Affairs, Dublin.

4. On 14 October 1986 the European Commission of Human Rights

declared admissible the applicant's complaints under Article 14 in

conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention concerning the absence of

inheritance rights on intestacy over the estates of her father and her

parents' near relatives. The remainder of her application was

declared inadmissible*.

5. The Commission then proceeded to carry out its task under

Article 28 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 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."

6. The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly

settlement of the case and on 17 December 1987 it adopted this Report,

which, in accordance with Article 30 of the Convention, is confined to

a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.

___________________

* This decision is public and can be obtained from the Commission

on request.

7. The following members of the Commission were present when the

Report was adopted:

MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President

J. A. FROWEIN

G. SPERDUTI

A. S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J. C. SOYER

H. G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

G. BATLINER

J. CAMPINOS

Sir Basil HALL

Mr. F. MARTINEZ

Mr. C. L. ROZAKIS

PART I

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

8. The applicant was born out of wedlock in 1937. Her natural

father lived with the applicant's mother from 1936 until his death in

1975. The applicant married in 1958 and resides, at present, in

England.

9. When her natural father died in 1975 he left an estate valued

at approximately £1,600. One of his surviving sisters applied to the

probate office as next of kin for letters of administration to his

estate. On 7 October 1975 the applicant entered a caveat to that

application. Proceedings were then issued by her natural father's

sister, seeking an order setting aside the caveat and granting her

liberty to proceed with the application for a grant of administration.

The applicant in her defence contended inter alia that she was

entitled to claim a share of the estate. In decisions of the High

Court of 5 April 1982 and the Supreme Court of 20 January 1984 it was

held that the applicant was not entitled to succeed on intestacy, not

being "issue" within the meaning of Section 67 of the Succession Act

1965. It was also held that Sections 67 and 69 of the 1965 Act did

not infringe the principle of equality before the law guaranteed under

Article 40 section 1 of the Irish Constitution. Sections 67 and 69 of

the 1965 Act regulate the distribution of an estate to members of the

family when a person dies intestate.

10. Before the Commission the applicant complained inter alia of

the absence of any right of succession on the intestacy of her natural

father. She further complained of the absence of any inheritance

rights on intestacy over the estates of relatives on either her

mother's or her father's side. She contended that she had been

excluded from any right to succeed, contrary to Article 14 of the

Convention, solely because of her status as a person born out of

wedlock.

11. On 16 May 1985 the Commission decided to bring the application

to the notice of the respondent Government and to invite them to

submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the

applicant's complaints. The observations of the Government were

received on 26 September 1985 and the applicant's observations in

reply were received on 13 November 1985.

12. On 5 March 1986 the Commission decided to hold a hearing on

the applicant's complaints under Article 14 in conjunction with

Article 8 concerning the absence of any inheritance rights on

intestacy. This hearing was held in Strasbourg on 14 October 1986,

the applicant being represented by Mr. K. E. O'Brien, Solicitor,

Bowler, Geraghty & Co., Senator M. Robinson, S.C. and

Mr. E. Stewart, S.C. The Government were represented by Ms. J. Liddy,

Agent, Mr. D. Gleeson, S.C., Mr. J. O'Reilly, Counsel and Mr. M. Russell,

Office of the Attorney General.

13. On 17 July 1987 the applicant was granted legal aid by the

Commission in respect of her legal representation.

PART II

SOLUTION REACHED

14. 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(b) of the Convention, and invited the parties to submit any

proposals they wished to make.

15. In accordance with the usual practice the Secretary of the

Commission contacted the parties and was informed that discussions

were taking place between them concerning the question of legal

costs and compensation. The Secretary was also informed that the

Status of Children Bill 1986, which abolishes the distinctions under

Irish law between children born out of wedlock and children born

within wedlock, was pending before the Irish Parliament.

16. In a letter dated 24 July 1987 the respondent Government

indicated that the discussions which had taken place between the

parties concerning a possible settlement had proved unsuccessful.

The Commission was invited to exercise its good offices in order to

assist the parties to reach a setlement.

17. A meeting was subsequently held in Dublin on 20 November 1987

between the representatives of the parties and the Secretary to the

Commission accompanied by a member of the Secretariat.

18. At the meeting the parties reached an agreement which they

confirmed in writing to the Commission. On 8 December 1987 the

Government's Agent, Mr. P. Smyth, addressed the following

telex to the Commission:

"I have the honour to refer to the consultations which took

place in Dublin, on 20 November 1987, concerning a friendly

settlement in the Stoutt case and I am able to state that the

Government of Ireland are prepared to make an ex gratia

payment of 10,000 IR pounds to Mrs. Mary Catherine Stoutt

with a view to achieving a friendly settlement of the above

application.

The Government of Ireland would recall that in the Status of

Children Bill 1986, they have initiated legislation the

purpose of which is to equalise the rights under the law of

all children, whether born within or outside marriage. This

legislation was passed by Seanad Éireann (Upper House of

Parliament) on 21 January 1987. Subsequently the Bill was

passed, with some amendments, by Dáil Éireann (Lower House

of Parliament) on 18 November 1987. The Bill, which is

considered by virtue of Article 20.2.2 of the Constitution

of Ireland as a Bill initiated in Dáil Éireann has been sent

to Seanad Eireann for that House to consider the Provisions

of the Bill further in the light of the Dáil Éireann

amendments."

19. On 15 December 1987 Mr. K. E. O'Brien, on behalf of the

applicant, sent the following telex to the Commission:

"We confirm that Mrs. Stoutt is prepared to accept the

offer of 10,000 IR pounds as a settlement of her case."

20. At its session on 17 December 1987, the Commission found from

the above letters that the parties had reached agreement on the terms

of a settlement. The Commission further found, having regard to the

Status of Children Bill 1986 and Article 28 (b) of the Convention

that a friendly settlement of the application had been secured on the

basis of respect for human rights as defined in the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present report.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C. A. NØRGAARD)

Menu

STOUTT v. IRELAND

STOUTT v. IRELAND