Final Resolution DH (2000) 92

Human Rights

Application No. 27347/95

Lane against the United Kingdom

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 24 July 2000 at the 716th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),

Having regard to Interim Resolution DH (99) 361, adopted on 9 June 1999 in the case of Lane against the United Kingdom, in which the Committee of Ministers decided that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention insofar as the applicant did not have a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law in the context of certain criminal proceedings brought against him before a naval court-martial and decided to make public the report of the European Commission of Human Rights;

Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals made by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards just satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated 30 October 1999;

Whereas at the 695th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agre e ing with the Commission’s proposals, held by a decision adopted on 14 February 2000, in accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the Government of the respondent State was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, 4 717.63 pounds sterling in respect of costs and expenses, and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay at the statutory rate applicable on the date of this decision, it being understood that the interest would accrue from the expiry of the time-limit until full payment was placed at the disposal of the applicant;

Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 9 June 1999 and 14 February 2000, having regard to the United Kingdom’s obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4, of the Convention to abide by them;

Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the respondent State recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new violations of the same kind as the one found in this case, notably through the modification of the provisions in the Army Act 1955 by the Armed Forces Act 1996 which entered into force on 1 April 1997, (see Resolutions DH (98) 11 and DH (98) 12 in the Coyne and Findlay cases against the United Kingdom) , and indicated that the Commission’s report as well as the Committee of Ministers’ decisions had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned;

Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on 9 May 2000, within the time-limit set, the Government of the respondent State had paid the applicant the total sum of 4 717.63 pounds sterling as just satisfaction,

Declares, after having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its fun c tions under Article 32 of the Convention in this case.