Search
document

Document text Analytics

HILTON AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 5613/72 • ECHR ID: 001-49228

Document date: June 9, 1994

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

HILTON AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 5613/72 • ECHR ID: 001-49228

Document date: June 9, 1994

Cited paragraphs only

RESOLUTION DH (79) 3

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of

the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and

Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as the "Convention"),

Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of

Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the Convention

relating to the application lodged by Mr Arthur Hilton against the

United Kingdom (Application No. 5613/72);

Whereas on 9 June 1978 the Commission transmitted the said report to

the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months

provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1) of the Convention

has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European

Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the

Convention;

Whereas in his application introduced on 4 May 1972 the applicant

complained that he was ill-treated by prison staff during his

detention in prison, thus alleging ill-treatment amounting to inhuman

and degrading treatment or punishment contrary to Article 3 (art. 3)

of the Convention, of obstruction by the Home Office on two occasions

to allow him to instruct a solicitor contrary to his right of access

to courts in the determination of his civil rights ensured by

Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention as interpreted by the

European Court of Human Rights in its judgment of 21 February 1975 in

the Golder case, of unjustified censorhsip of his correspondence

contrary to his right to respect for correspondence as guaranteed by

Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention;

Whereas the Commission in its decision of 15 March 1976 declared the

application admissible insofar as it concerned complaints under

Articles 3, 6 and 8 (art. 3, art. 6, art. 8) and declared the

remainder of the application inadmissible as being immaterial to the

allegations made;

Whereas by decision of 8 July 1977, the Commission adjourned

its examination of the applicant's allegations concerning

censorship of his letters until conclusions could be drawn from

seven applications against the United Kingdom presently before

the Commission concerning censorship of prisoners' letters;

Whereas the Commission in its report adopted on 6 March 1978 expressed

the opinion by 10 votes to 4 that no breach of Article 3 (art. 3) of

the Convention was disclosed in respect of the applicant's allegations

of specific incidents of ill-treatment and, unanimously, that in his

denials of authorisation to institute proceedings, the Home Secretary

failed to respect the applicant's right to go before a civil court and

that therefore the facts of the complaints disclose a breach of

Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention;

Whereas during the examination of this case, the Committee of

Ministers was informed by the Government of the United Kingdom that it

agreed with these conclusions but not with all the contents of the

Commission's report; and furthermore that, whilst accepting that in

this case there was a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1)

of the Convention as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights

in the Golder case, it considered that no measure was required within

the meaning of paragraph 2 of Article 32 (art. 32-2) since the

complaint made by Mr Hilton arose before the judgment of the Court in

the Golder case and the points of principle raised by this application

had already been met by the change made in the law of the United

Kingdom, as shown by Resolution (76) 35 adopted by the Committee of

Ministers on 22 June 1976 in application of Article 54 (art. 54)

of the Convention in the Golder case, and in Resolution DH (78) 3

adopted on 19 April 1978 in application of Article 32 (art. 32) of the

Convention in the case of Kiss against the United Kingdom, and that

reparation had been offered by the United Kingdom to the applicant and

rejected by him;

Agreeing, subject to the foregoing, with the opinion expressed by the

Commission in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1) of

the Convention;

Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1

(art. 32-1) of the Convention,

a. Decides that in this case there has been no violation of Article 3

(art. 3) of the Convention;

b. Decides that in this case there has been a violation of

Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention;

c. Decides, having regard to the information supplied by the

Government of the United Kingdom, that no further action is called for

in this case.

* *

RESOLUTION DH (94) 35

The Committee of Ministers,

Whereas the Committee decided to terminate its examination

of the Hilton case by Resolution DH (79) 3 and the Kiss case by

Resolution DH (78) 3;

Having regard to the request formulated by the Government

of the United Kingdom on 18 April 1994 to have the reports

adopted by the European Commission of Human Rights on

8 October 1977 in the case of Kiss against the United Kingdom

(Application No. 6224/73) and on 6 March 1978 in the case of

Hilton against the United Kingdom (Application No. 5613/72) made

public,

Decides to make public the above-mentioned reports of the

Commission.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant