Search
document

Document text Analytics

MALONE CASE

Doc ref: 8691/79 • ECHR ID: 001-55435

Document date: April 11, 1986

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

MALONE CASE

Doc ref: 8691/79 • ECHR ID: 001-55435

Document date: April 11, 1986

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 judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

in the Malone case, delivered on 2 August 1984 and 26 April 1985 and

transmitted the same days to the Committee of Ministers;

Recalling that the case had its origins in an application against the

United Kingdom lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights

under Article 25 (art. 25) of the convention by a United Kingdom

citizen Mr James Malone complaining of the admitted interception

of a telephone conversation to which he had been a party,

stating his belief that, at the behest of the police, his

correspondence and also that of his wife had been intercepted,

his telephone lines "tapped" and, in addition, his telephone "metered"

by a device recording all the numbers dialled and claiming that by

reason of these matters, and of relevant law and practice in England

and Wales, he had been the victim of breaches of Articles 8 and 13

(art. 8, art. 13) of the convention;

Recalling that the case had been brought before the Court by the

European Commission of Human Rights;

Whereas in its judgment of 2 August 1984 the Court:

- Held unanimously that there had been a breach of Article 8 (art. 8) of

the convention;

- Held by sixteen votes to two that it was not necessary also to examine

the case under Article 13 (art. 13);

- Held unanimously that the question of the application of Article 50

(art. 50) was not ready for decision;

Whereas in its judgment of 26 April 1985, the Court having been

notified of a friendly settlement reached between the Government and

the applicant in respect of the latter's claims under Article 50

(art. 50) of the convention, and having found that the settlement

reached was "equitable", unanimously decided to strike the case out of

its list;

Having regard to the "Rules concerning the application of Article 54

(art. 54) of the convention";

Recalling that Rule 48, paragraph 3, of the Rules of Court of the

European Court of Human Rights provides that the striking out of a

case shall be effected by means of a judgment which the President

shall forward to the Committee of Ministers in order to allow it to

supervise, in accordance with Article 54 (art. 54) of the convention,

the execution of any undertaking which may have been attached to the

discontinuance or solution of the matter;

Having invited the Government of the United Kingdom, having regard to

its obligations under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention, to

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

judgment of 2 August 1984;

Having also invited the Government of the United Kingdom to inform it

of the measures taken for the execution of the undertakings attached

to the solution of the claims concerning Article 50 (art. 50) as noted

in the judgment of 26 April 1985;

Whereas, during the examination of this case by the Committee of

Ministers, the Government of the United Kingdom informed the Committee

of Ministers of the measures taken, which information appears at the

appendix to this resolution,

Declares, having taken note of this information, that it has exercised

its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the convention in this

case.

Appendix to Resolution DH (86) 1

Information provided by the Government of the United Kingdom during

the examination of the Malone case before the Committee of Ministers

The Interception of Communications Act has been passed by both

Houses of the British Parliament and received Royal Assent on

25 July 1985. It came into force on 10 April 1986. The Act brings

United Kingdom law on the interception of communications into

compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights as interpreted

by the judgment of the European Court. It does so by establishing a

comprehensive statutory framework governing the interception of

communications on the public postal and telecommunications systems, in

which the grounds for authorised interception are expressly set out,

and in which any interception carried out other than in accordance

with the Act's provisions is made a criminal offence.

The Government of the United Kingdom has paid to the applicant the sum

mentioned in the friendly settlement reached between the Government

and the applicant in respect of the latter's claims under Article 50

(art. 50) of the convention.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant