Search
document

Document text Analytics

CASE OF OBSERVER AND GUARDIAN AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 13585/88 • ECHR ID: 001-55525

Document date: May 15, 1992

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

CASE OF OBSERVER AND GUARDIAN AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 13585/88 • ECHR ID: 001-55525

Document date: May 15, 1992

Cited paragraphs only

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54

(art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights

and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the

Convention"),

Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human

Rights in the case of the Observer and the Guardian against the

United Kingdom delivered on 26 November 1991 and transmitted the

same day to the Committee of Ministers;

Recalling that the case originated in an application against

the United Kingdom lodged with the European Commission of Human

Rights on 27 January 1988 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the

Convention by two companies incorporated in England, The Observer

Ltd and Guardian Newspapers Ltd, and five British citizens,

Mr Donald Trelford, Mr David Leigh, Mr Paul Lashmar,

Mr Peter Preston and Mr Richard Norton-Taylor who complained that

interlocutory injunctions, in force from July 1986 to

October 1988, restrained them from publishing details of

unauthorised memoirs alleging unlawful conduct by the security

service and information obtained from their author, a former

employee of the service;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the

Commission on 12 October 1990 and by the Government of the United

Kingdom on 23 November 1990;

Whereas in its judgment of 26 November 1991 the Court:

- held by fourteen votes to ten that there had been no

violation of Article 10 (art. 10) of the Convention

during the period from 11 July 1986 to 30 July 1987;

- held unanimously that there had been a violation of

Article 10 (art. 10) during the period from

30 July 1987 to 13 October 1988;

- held unanimously that there had been no violation of

Article 13 or of Article 14 taken in conjunction with

Article 10 (art. 13+10, art. 14+10);

- held unanimously that the United Kingdom was to pay,

within three months, to the applicants jointly the sum

of 100 000 pounds sterling, together with any

value-added tax that may be chargeable, for costs and

expenses;

- dismissed unanimously the remainder of the claim for

just satisfaction;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of

Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of

the Convention;

Having invited the Government of the United Kingdom to

inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of

the judgment of 26 November 1991, having regard to its obligation

under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;

Having satisfied itself that the Government of the United

Kingdom has paid the applicants on 18 December 1991 the sum

provided for in the judgment of 26 November 1991,

Declares that it has exercised its functions under

Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant