Search
document

Document text Analytics

ABBOTT v. the UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 15006/89 • ECHR ID: 001-792

Document date: December 10, 1990

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

ABBOTT v. the UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 15006/89 • ECHR ID: 001-792

Document date: December 10, 1990

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 15006/89

by Brian ABBOTT

against the United Kingdom

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

10 December 1990 the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

S. TRECHSEL

F. ERMACORA

G. SPERDUTI

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 26 April 1989

by Brian ABBOTT against the United Kingdom and registered on 17 May

1989 under file No. 15006/89;

Having regard to:

- reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure

of the Commission;

- the Commission's decision of 2 October 1989 to bring the

application to the notice of the respondent Government

and invite them to submit written observations on its

admissibility and merits;

- the information submitted by the Government on 20 February

and 23 November 1990;

- the response of the applicant on 4 December 1990;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a citizen of the United Kingdom, born in

1972, who, at the time of lodging his application, was living at the

St Charles Youth Treatment Centre, Brentwood, Essex. He is

represented before the Commission by Ms. Rachel Hodgkin of the

Children's Legal Centre, London.

The applicant had a troubled upbringing, becoming a violent

juvenile delinquent, which has resulted in his detention in one

institution or another since the age of 12. In January 1987, after

being made a ward of court, the applicant was placed in secure

accommodation by a Wardship Judge. As a ward of court he was not a

party to these proceedings and had no one, not even a guardian-ad-

litem, to represent his views. During his detention he alleged that

he was ill-treated, including several extensive periods of solitary

confinement. He claimed to have no possibility to challenge the

lawfulness of his detention. The applicant invoked Articles 3, 5

paras. 1 and 4, 6 para. 1 and 14 of the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 26 April 1989 and registered

on 17 May 1989. After a preliminary examination of the case by a

Rapporteur, the Commission decided, on 2 October 1989, to give notice

of the application to the respondent Government and to invite the

parties to submit their written observations on admissibility and

merits, pursuant to Rule 42 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure

(former version).

On 20 February 1990 the Government informed the Commission

that they wished to explore the possibility of a settlement of the

application. The parties thereafter exchanged their views on the

matter. As a result, on 23 November 1990, the Government made the

following proposals in full and final settlement of the applicant's

claims :

"1. The Government will make the applicant an ex gratia

payment of £7,000.

2. The new draft Secure Accommodation Regulations arising

from the Children Act 1989 (intended to come into force in

1991) will be amended so as to apply to:

(i) wards who are in secure accommodation when the

Children Act comes into force; and

(ii) wards for whom secure accommodation applications

are made after the Children Act is implemented.

These measures will provide for legal representation and

will restrict the length of time for which a period of

secure accommodation can last.

3. Further, the Government will use its best endeavours

to have the rules of court amended to ensure that where

an issue of secure accommodation arises in respect of a

ward of court the ward, if of sufficient understanding,

will be entitled to appoint and instruct a solicitor of

his own choice to represent him in the proceedings.

4. The Government will pay the applicant's

and reasonable> legal costs in bringing the application."

On 4 December 1990 Ms. Hodgkin informed the Commission that

the applicant accepted the Government's offer and that, accordingly,

he wished to withdraw his application.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicant wishes to withdraw his

application having agreed to the Government's proposals of a financial

nature, as well as of a general nature, concerning a reform in the law

and practice in wardship cases like his. It concludes, therefore,

that the applicant does not intend to pursue his petition further, the

factual basis of which has been resolved, within the meaning of

Article 30 para. 1 (a) and (b) of the Convention. Moreover, the

Commission finds no reasons of a general character affecting respect

for Human Rights, as defined in the Convention, which require the

further examination of the case by virtue of Article 30 para. 1 in

fine of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF THE LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant