Search
document

Document text Analytics

A. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 11413/85 • ECHR ID: 001-565

Document date: May 13, 1986

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

A. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 11413/85 • ECHR ID: 001-565

Document date: May 13, 1986

Cited paragraphs only

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

13 May 1986, the following members being present:

MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President

J. A. FROWEIN

F. ERMACORA

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

S. TRECHSEL

B. KIERNAN

A. WEITZEL

J. C. SOYER

H. G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

G. BATLINER

Mrs. G. H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

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 (art. 25);

Having regard to the application introduced on 26 February 1985 by R.A. against

the United Kingdom and registered on 4 March 1986 under file No. 11413/85;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of

Procedure of the Commission;

Having regard to:

- the Commission's decision of 9 October 1985 to bring the

applicationto the notice of the respondent Government but

not to invite them to submit observations on its admissibility

at this stage and to adjourn the application pending the

Judgment of the Court in the case of James and Others

- the Commission's decision of 8 March 1986 to ask the applicant

pursuant to Rule 42 para. 2(a) whether he wishes to pursue his

application in view of the judgment in the case of James

and Others;

- the applicant's reply of 14 April 1986.

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The facts as they have been submitted on behalf of the applicant, a

British citizen born in 1921 and resident in Fife, Scotland, by his

representatives, Messrs. J.C. and A. Steuart, W.S., Solicitors, of

Edinburgh, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant is proprietor of the Estate of Watten and South Dunn in

the County of Caithness in Scotland and landlord of the properties

which are the subject of this application and which form part of this

Estate.

In September 1984 the applicant agreed to sell part of his Estate

known as Knapperfield to the tenant, S., such sale including the site

of S.'s dwelling house at Knapperfield. The farm of Knapperfield is a

registered croft under the Crofters Acts 1955 and 1961 and as such the

sale was subject to the terms of the Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act

1976 ("the 1976 Act"). Section 1 of the 1976 Act gives a crofter the

right to require the landlord to convey to him both the croft tenanted

by him and the site of any dwelling house on such croft. Section 4 of

the 1976 Act entitles the crofter to seek an order as to the terms of

such conveyance from the Land Court failing agreement with the

landlord. Section 4 (2)(a) provides that the consideration payable

for the conveyance of the site of the dwelling house shall be:

"4 (2)(a) the amount as determined by the Land Court which the site,

if sold in the open market by a willing seller, might be expected to

realise assuming that -

(i) there were or would be no buildings on the site;

(ii) the site were available with vacant possession;

(iii) the site were not land to which the Crofters (Scotland) Acts

1955 and 1961 apply; and

(iv) no development of the site were or would be permitted in

pursuance of the Town and County Planning (Scotland) Act 1972."

In view of the terms of the 1976 Act the applicant and S. agreed upon

a price for the croft and the dwelling house and the portion of this

price which related to the site of the dwelling house was £5.

In December 1984 the applicant agreed to sell two further crofts to

the tenant M. This sale included the site of the dwelling house, and

the proportion of the sale price referable to the dwelling house

pursuant to the provisions of the 1976 Act was agreed between the

parties to be £5.

On 17 December 1985 the applicant's representative informed the

Commission of two further sales under the 1976 Act, the first on 20

December 1984 and the second on 26 November 1985. The latter

transaction did not involve the sale of a dwelling house.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains that the effect of the 1976 Act as it applies

to him is to compel him to sell his property contrary to his wishes

and to Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1). He also contends that the

operation of the 1976 Act is discriminatory contrary to Article 14 of

the Convention (art. 14) and that he has no remedy under Scots law for

these alleged violations of the Convention contrary to Article 13

(art. 13).

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 26 February 1985 and registered

on 4 March 1985.

On 9 October 1985 the Commission decided to give notice of the

application to the respondent Government pursuant to Rule 42

para. 2(b) of the Rules of Procedure without requesting observations

at that stage and to adjourn its examination of the application

pending the judgment of the Court in the case of James and Others.

The Court's judgment was given in that case on 21 February 1986 and on

8 March 1986 the Commission decided to ask the applicant, pursuant to

Rule 42 para. 2(a) of its Rules of Procedure, whether he wished to

pursue his application in the light of the Court's judgment in that

case.

On 14 April 1986 the applicant's representatives informed the

Commission that, in the light of the Court's decision in the case of

James and Others, the applicant does not wish to pursue his

application.

FINDING OF THE COMMISSION

The applicant complained that the right for tenants to purchase the

croft farms which they rented from the applicant under the terms of

the 1976 Act was in breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1)

and Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention (art. 13, art. 14).

However, in view of the Court's judgment in the case of James and

Others, the applicant has informed the Commission that he wishes to

withdraw his application.

The Commission finds that the applicant does not wish to maintain his

application and that there are no reasons of a general character

affecting the observance of the Convention which necessitate a further

examination of the case.

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