[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Wayne BLACK The United Kingdom - 37685/09 [2011] EHCR 2084 (29 November 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/2084.html Cite as: [2011] EHCR 2084

[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 37685/09
Wayne BLACK
against the United Kingdom

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 29 November 2011 as a Chamber composed of:

Lech Garlicki, President,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Nicolas Bratza,
Päivi Hirvelä,
George Nicolaou,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,

Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Wayne Black, is a British and Irish national who was born in 1967 and at the time of the lodging of his application was detained at HM Prison Wakefield. He was represented before the Court by Mr S. Creighton of Bhatt Murphy Solicitors, a firm of solicitors based in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Y. Ahmed, of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

On 26 July 1995 the applicant was sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment. On 8 January 1996 he was sentenced to a further four years’ imprisonment, to run consecutively with the twenty-year sentence. He was therefore effectively serving a determinate sentence of twenty-four years. He became eligible for parole on 30 June 2006.

Shortly before his parole eligibility date, the applicant had his suitability for release on parole licence considered by the Parole Board on 2 May 2006, after he had served half of his sentence. The Parole Board recommended the applicant’s release on parole on the basis that the risk to the public had been reduced and that a highly supportive release arrangement was an appropriate way to manage the difficult transition from secure prison conditions to release.

Under the legislation in force at the time, the final decision on early release in cases involving prisoners serving determinate sentences (i.e. fixed-term sentences) of more than fifteen years’ imprisonment lay with the Secretary of State. For prisoners serving determinate sentences of less than fifteen years and for prisoners serving indeterminate (i.e. life) sentences, the approval of the Secretary of State following a positive recommendation of the Parole Board was not required.

On 29 August 2006 the Secretary of State rejected the recommendation of the Parole Board in the applicant’s case, concluding that the risk that the applicant would re-offend was too high to permit early release. As a result, the applicant was not released.

The applicant commenced judicial review proceedings in respect of the decision not to release him. On 21 January 2009 the House of Lords dismissed his claim.

The applicant became entitled to release on parole, having served two thirds of his sentence, on 30 June 2010. It is not known whether he has now been released.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complained under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention that he did not have the lawfulness of his detention determined by a court as a result of the Secretary of State’s decision to reject the recommendation of the Parole Board that he should be released on licence.

THE LAW

On 17 October 2011 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I, Derek Walton, Agent for the Government of the United Kingdom, declare that the Government of the United Kingdom offer to pay, ex gratia to Wayne Black, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, 22,500 euros to cover any and all pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

This sum will be converted into pounds sterling at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”

The Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’s representatives:

“We, Bhatt Murphy Solicitors, note that the Government of the United Kingdom are prepared to pay ex gratia to Wayne Black, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, 22,500 euros to cover any and all pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

This sum will be converted into pounds sterling at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Having consulted our client, we would inform you that he accepts the proposal and waives any further claims against the United Kingdom in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. He declares that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”

The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention) in light of the amendments to the applicable legislation set out in Clift v. the United Kingdom, no. 7205/07, §§ 32-34, 13 July 2010, which have now fully entered into force.

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Lawrence Early Lech Garlicki
Registrar President