Search
document

Document text Analytics

S. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 10510/83 • ECHR ID: 001-193

Document date: May 11, 1988

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

S. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 10510/83 • ECHR ID: 001-193

Document date: May 11, 1988

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 10510/83

by K. and K. S.

against the United Kingdom

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

11 May 1988, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

J.A. FROWEIN

S. TRECHSEL

G. SPERDUTI

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

G. BATLINER

H. VANDENBERGHE

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

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 8 January 1983

by K. and K. STUDLEY against the United Kingdom and registered on 11

July 1983 under file No. 10510/83;

Having regard to:

- reports provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure

of the Commission;

- the Commission's decision of 2 October 1984 to bring the

application to the notice of the respondent Government

and invite them to submit written observations on its

admissibilty and merits;

- ii -

10510/83

- the observations submitted by the respondent Government on

13 February 1985 and the observations in reply submitted

by the applicants on 26 March 1985;

- the Commission's decision of 8 May 1987 to invite the

respondent Government to submit further observations on

the admissibility and merits of the case;

- the proposal put forward by the Government on 3 February

1988;

- the applicants' acceptance of that proposal on 5 May 1988;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

10510/83

THE FACTS

The applicants, United Kingdom citizens, are mother and son,

and live in B. The second applicant was born in 1971. They are

represented before the Commission by Mrs. P. McBain, Messrs. Wilford

McBain, Solicitors, London.

On 22 October 1982, the second applicant, then aged 11, was

given two strokes of the cane by a senior teacher at his state school

for his alleged involvement in a conspiracy to assault a fellow

pupil. The caning caused weals to the boy's skin. The same day the

first applicant and her husband unsuccessfully complained to the

teacher concerned and the police. After correspondence with the

education authorities and the school headmaster, the latter invited

the first applicant and her husband to a meeting to discuss their

son's education and informed them that the senior staff had been

instructed not to corporally punish the boy. However, on 26 May 1983

the second applicant was given two strokes across his hips with a

meter rule by his teacher for alleged misbehaviour in class.

COMPLAINTS

The applicants complained to the Commission that the corporal

punishment constituted violations of Article 3 of the Convention and

Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 8 January 1983 and registered

on 11 July 1983.

After a preliminary examination of the case by the Rapporteur,

the Commission considered the admissibility of the application on

2 October 1984. It decided to bring the application to the notice of

the respondent Government pursuant to Rule 42 (2) (b) of its Rules of

Procedure and to invite them to submit written observations on the

admissibility and merits of the application.

The Government's observations were received on 13 February

1985, to which the applicants replied on 26 March 1985.

On 8 May 1987, the Commission decided to invite the respondent

Government to submit further observations on the admissibility and

merits of the application pursuant to Rule 43 para. 3 (a) of the Rules

of Procedure.

However, further observations were not submitted and the

Government expressed the wish on 5 August 1987 to explore the

possibility of resolving the case.

The Commission decided on 12 December 1987 to suspend the

proceedings and to invite the Government to make specific proposals

for the resolution of the application.

10510/83

On 3 February 1988 the Government made the following offer:

The Government recalled the provisions of the Education (No. 2) Act

1986 and the abolition of corporal punishment in United Kingdom state

schools. Moreover, without prejudice to their position on the merits

of the application, they proposed an ex gratia payment of £3000 to

the applicants.

On 3 May 1988, the applicants' representative accepted the

offer.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes the Government's offer to pay the

applicants an ex gratia sum of £3000 to resolve the application and

the applicants' acceptance of the offer. The Commission considers,

given the reform of the law on corporal punishment in state schools,

that there are no reasons of a general character affecting the

observance of the Convention which necessitate the further retention

of this case. The Commission, therefore, concludes that the issues in

the case are resolved and that, in the circumstances, the applicants

do not intend to pursue this application (Rule 44 para. 1 (b) of the

Commission's Rules of Procedure).

For these reasons, the Commission

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant