Search
document

Document text Analytics

GRANGER CASE

Doc ref: 11932/86 • ECHR ID: 001-55515

Document date: November 18, 1991

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

GRANGER CASE

Doc ref: 11932/86 • ECHR ID: 001-55515

Document date: November 18, 1991

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 Granger case, delivered on 28 March 1990 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 5 December 1985 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the

Convention by Mr Joseph Granger, a British national, who

complained that he had been refused legal aid for his

representation at a hearing of his appeal against conviction for

perjury;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the

Government of the United Kingdom on 27 February 1989 and by the

Commission on 16 March 1989;

Whereas in its judgment of 28 March 1990 the Court:

- dismissed unanimously the government's objection of

non-exhaustion of domestic remedies;

- held unanimously that there had been a violation of

paragraph 3.c, taken together with paragraph 1, of Article 6

(art. 6-3-c, art. 6-1) of the Convention;

- held unanimously that it was not necessary to examine

the case under Articles 5, 8 and 13 (art. 5, art. 8, art. 13);

- held by four votes to three that the United Kingdom was

to pay to the applicant 1 000 pounds for non-pecuniary damage;

- held unanimously that the United Kingdom was to pay to

the applicant 7 000 pounds, inclusive of value added tax, for

legal 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 28 March 1990, having regard to its obligation

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

Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee

of Ministers, the Government of the United Kingdom gave the

Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of

the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this

resolution;

Having satisfied itself that the Government of the United

Kingdom has paid the applicant the sums provided for in the

judgment,

Declares, after having taken note of the information

supplied by the Government of the United Kingdom, that it has

exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the

Convention in this case.

Appendix to Resolution DH(91)29

Information provided by the Government of the United Kingdom

during the examination of the Granger case

before the Committee of Ministers

The whole system for the administration of legal aid was

reformed by the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 which came into

effect on 1 April 1987. In particular, the former functions of

the Legal Aid Committee of the Law Society of Scotland were

transferred to the Scottish Legal Aid Board.

The availability of legal aid in connection with an appeal

against, inter alia, conviction is determined by Section 25 of

this act and also by Section 13 of the Criminal Legal Aid

(Scotland) Regulations 1987.

As regards refusal to grant legal aid in connection with any

criminal and justiciary appeals, the Scottish Lord Justice

General circulated a Practice Note to all appeal court chairmen

and clerks on 4 December 1990.

According to this Practice Note, in any appeal where legal

aid has been refused and the court considers that, prima facie,

an appellant may have substantial grounds for taking the appeal

and it is in the interests of justice that he should have legal

representation in arguing these grounds, the court will adjourn

the hearing ex-officio, even if a request to that effect was not

put forward by the appellant, and make a recommendation to the

Legal Aid Board that the decision to refuse legal aid should be

reviewed.

The sums awarded to the applicant by the Court were paid on

5 April 1990.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant