Resolution CM/ ResDH (2011)173 [1]

Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

Grant against the United Kingdom

(Application No. 32570/03, judgment of 23 May 2006, final on 23 August 2006)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);

Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;

Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the failure to recognise legally the change of gender of a post-operative male-to-female transsexual person and the refusal to pay her a state pension at the age applicable to women (violation of Article 8) (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the mea s ures taken to comply with the United Kingdom ’ s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Conve n tion to abide by the judgment;

Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee ’ s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the a p plicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),

Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:

- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and

- of general measures, preventing similar violations;

DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exe r cised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and

DECIDES to close the exam ination of this case.

Appendix to Resolution CM/ ResDH (2011)173

Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of

Grant against the United Kingdom

Introductory case summary

This case concerns the failure to recognise legally the applicant ’ s change of gender and the refusal to pay her a state pension at the age applicable to women (violation of Article 8). The applicant, a post-operative male-to-female transsexual person, applied for a pension in 1997 to begin on her 60th birthday but was refused by the Adjudication Officer on the grounds that the applicant was not eligible for pension until 65, the retirement age applicable to men.

I. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures

a) Details of just satisfaction

Pecuniary damage

Non-pecuniary damage

Costs and expenses

Total

1 700 EUR

--

28 149 EUR

29 849 EUR

Paid on 13/07/2006

b) Individual measures

The applicant has been issued a Gender Recognition Certificate and now receives the state pension as a woman. Consequently, no other individual measures were considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.

II. General measures

In response to the case of Christine Goodwin against the United Kingdom (Application No. 28957/95, judgment of 11 July 2002), the government passed the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (which entered into force on 4 April 2005), which allowed transsexual people to be legally recognised in their acquired gender, for matters including social security benefits and the receipt of a state pension, upon issue of a Gender Recognition Certificate.

The judgment of the European Court was published in All England Law Reports [2006] All ER (D) 337, and was disseminated through the intranet site of the Department for Work and Pensions.

III. Conclusions of the respondent state

The government considers that the measures adopted have remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent new, similar violations and that the United Kingdom has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 14 September 2011 at the 1120th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies