FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 74457/12 Raymond William JUDE against the United Kingdom

The European Court of Human Rights ( Fourth Section ), sitting on 11 March 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Nona Tsotsoria , President , Paul Mahoney, Krzysztof Wojtyczek , judges,

and Fatoş Aracı , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 November 2012 ,

Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1 . The applicant, Mr Raymond William Jude , is a British national who was born in 1967 and lives in Dunbar . He was represented before the Court by Ms R. Cameron of John Pryde & Co SSC , a lawyer practising in Edinburgh .

2. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, M s I. Rao of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office .

3. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

4. The applicant was charged, inter alia , with one charge of indecent assault and two charges of attempted rape. At trial the prosecution relied on the applicant ’ s police interviews, which had taken place without him having access to a lawyer (either before or during the interviews). The applicant was convicted of all three charges and sentenced to eleven years ’ imprisonment. On appeal against conviction the prosecution recognised that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention in conjunction with Article 6 § 1; however, the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant ’ s appeal because it found there to be sufficient evidence for his conviction without the evidence from the police interviews. It therefore found that there was no real possibility that the jury would have arrived at a different verdict had they not had that evidence before them.

5. The applicant was refused leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.

6. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention in conjunction with Article 6 § 1 that his trial was unfair because he was denied access to a lawyer during his detention and his statements to the police were subsequently relied on by the prosecution at trial .

THE LAW

7. On 16 October 2013 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:

“I, Raymond William Jude, note that the Government of the United Kingdom are prepared to pay me, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, 4,500 euros to cover any and all pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to me.

This sum will be converted into pounds sterling at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court to strike the case out of its list of cases. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against the United Kingdom in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”

8. On 6 January 2014 the Court received the following declaration signed by the Government:

“ I, Indira Rao , Agent for the Government of the United Kingdom, declare that the Government of the United Kingdom offer to pay to Raymond William Jude, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, 4,500 euros to cover any and all pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

This sum will be converted into pounds sterling at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court to strike the case out of its list of cases. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case. ”

9. The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application.

10. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.

Fatoş Aracı Nona Tsotsoria Deputy Registrar President