Enhancing Parliament's role in relation to human rights judgments - Human Rights Joint Committee Contents



Letter from the Chair of the Committee to Rt Hon Dawn Primarolo MP, Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families, Department for Children, Schools and Families, dated 21 July 2009

RK AND AK V UNITED KINGDOM (APP NO 38000(1)/05, 30 SEPTEMBER 2008)

  The Joint Committee on Human Rights is continuing its practice of reviewing the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) finding the UK to be in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

  I am writing to inquire about the Government's response to the judgment in RK and AK v United Kingdom. In RK and AK, the applicants complained that they did not have an effective remedy for their complaints relating to the taking into care of their child for child protection concerns arising from the child's injury. Their child was subsequently discovered to have brittle bone disease and was returned to the parents. The events occurred before the coming into force of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and the applicants were therefore unable to bring a claim for breach of Article 8 ECHR (the right to respect for family life). The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 13:

    "The Court considers that the applicants should have had available to them a means of claiming that the local authority's handling of the procedures was responsible for any damage which they suffered and obtaining compensation for that damage. Such redress was not available at the relevant time. Consequently, there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention." (para. 45)

  I would be grateful for your response to the following questions:

    1. How many current cases is the Government aware of which involve allegations of negligence and/or breaches of the Convention which predate the coming into force of the HRA? Of those, how many are before (a) the Court of Appeal, (b) the House of Lords and (c) the European Court of Human Rights?

    2. In relation to the cases mentioned in Question 1 above, is the Government taking steps to adequately settle those claims where there is a high likelihood of a finding of a breach of Article 13 by the ECtHR, in order to avoid the cost and inconvenience to both parties of pursuing a case to Strasbourg? If not, why not?

    3. Please provide details of the steps that the Government has taken to ensure that the implications of this judgment for local authorities and child protection agencies are widely known. For example, has the Government written to local authorities, or amended guidance, circulars or training to reflect the judgment?

    4. Has the Government advised local authorities and their lawyers not to seek strike outs in similar cases to RK and AK? If not, why not?

  In addition, please provide us with copies of the Government's submissions to the Committee of Ministers and ensure that we continue to be updated as further information is provided.

21 July 2009





 
previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2010
Prepared 26 March 2010