CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 8 mai 1987

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                    AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF                     Application No. 9584/81                   by J.G.                   against Ireland             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 8 May 1987,   the following members being present:                   MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President                   G. SPERDUTI                   F. ERMACORA                   G. JÖRUNDSSON                   G. TENEKIDES                   S. TRECHSEL                   B. KIERNAN                   A. S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                   A. WEITZEL                   J. C. SOYER                   H. G. SCHERMERS                   G. BATLINER                   H. VANDENBERGHE              Mrs.   G. H. THUNE              Sir   Basil HALL              Mr.   F. MARTINEZ                 Mr.   H. C. KRÜGER Secretary to the Commission           Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;           Having regard to the application introduced on 30 October 1981 by J.G. against Ireland and registered on 19 November 1981 under file N° 9584/81;           Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;           Having deliberated;           Decides as follows:   THE FACTS           The applicant, Mr J.G., is a citizen of Ireland, at present residing in Julianstown, Co.   Meath.   He is, at present, unemployed but formerly worked as a sales manager.   He is represented in the proceedings before the Commission by Mr Alan Shatter, Solicitor, Mary Robinson S.C., and Inge Clissman, barrister.           In 1962 the applicant married Anne Marie Briscoe in a Roman Catholic church in Drogheda, Ireland.   There were six children born of the marriage.   Since 9 December 1977 the applicant and his wife have lived apart after the applicant's wife deserted him.   The applicant claims that his wife's conduct caused the marriage relationship between them to break down irretrievably.   When Mrs Gill left the matrimonial home in December 1977, she took with her the two youngest children whom she kept until March 1978 when she returned them to the care of their father.   All six children have since remained in the care and custody of the applicant.   Since the above date it is claimed that Mrs Gill has not assumed any maternal responsibility for the children and has seen them only on visits.           In April 1969 the applicant states that he left the Roman Catholic church and became a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints.   He attends services of this church and he has instructed young members of the church at Sunday School.   The teaching of this church is not opposed to divorce in all circumstances, and the applicant believes that he would be entitled in good conscience and in conformity with his religious beliefs to apply for and obtain the remedy of divorce if such legal remedy were available in Ireland.           The applicant has sought legal advice concerning his family situation and was informed that the only circumstances in which he could obtain a divorce which would be recognised by the Irish courts would be if he established a domicile in a foreign jurisdiction and obtained a divorce from the courts of that jurisdiction.   He states that he is not in a financial position to do this and is not prepared to uproot his children from their home environment and schooling in order to seek a divorce in a foreign jurisdiction.   COMPLAINTS           The applicant complained under Articles 8 and 12 of the Convention that he is unable to seek a divorce and to re-marry under Irish law.           He further complained that the prohibition of divorce constitutes a breach of Article 9 since the church to which he belongs does not oppose divorce.           He also complained, under Article 14 of the Convention, that he is discriminated against on grounds of property in that he cannot afford to travel abroad and establish a domicile with a view to seeking a divorce in a foreign jurisdiction.           Finally he complained that he has no effective remedy in respect of his complaints in breach of Article 13 of the Convention.   PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION           The application was introduced on 30 October 1981 and registered on 19 November 1981.   It was first considered by the Commission on 3 March 1982 when it was decided to bring the application to the notice of the respondent Government without asking for observations on the applicant's complaints and to adjourn the application pending the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Johnston case which raised identical issues.           The European Court of Human Rights gave judgment in the Johnston case on 18 December 1986 (Series A no. 112) and found that the right to divorce cannot be derived from either Article 8 or Article 12 of the Convention and rejected similar complaints to those made by the applicant under under Articles 9, 13 and 14 of the Convention.           In the light of this decision, the applicant's legal representatives indicated, in a letter dated 5 March 1987, that the applicant no longer sought to pursue his application before the Commission.   REASONS FOR THE DECISION           The Commission notes that the applicant complained of the absolute prohibition on divorce in Ireland with the result that he is unable to re-marry.   He invoked Articles 8 (Art. 8), 9 (Art. 9), 12 (Art. 12), 13 (Art. 13) and 14 (Art. 14) of the Convention.   The Commission also notes that the applicant now seeks to withdraw his application in the light of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Johnston case (judgment of 18 December 1986).   The Commission finds that the applicant no longer seeks to pursue his application before the Commission and that there are no reasons relating to the general interest to continue an examination of the application.        For these reasons, the Commission        DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES   Secretary to the Commission             President of the Commission             (H. C. KRUGER)                          (C. A. NØRGAARD)