CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 17 décembre 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 } Application No. 10978/84 MARY CATHERINE STOUTT against IRELAND   (adopted on 17 December 1987)   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                 Page                  INTRODUCTION                                      2 - 3     Part   I:      STATEMENT OF THE FACTS                              4     Part   II:     SOLUTION REACHED                                  5 - 6     INTRODUCTION   1.      This Report relates to Application No. 10978/84 introduced by Mary Catherine Stoutt against Ireland on 30 May 1984 under Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.   The application was registered on 4 June 1984.   2.      The applicant was represented before the Commission by Senator M.   Robinson, S.C., Mr.   E. Stewart S.C., and Mr.   K. O'Brien of Bowler Geraghty and Company, solicitors, Dublin.   3.      The Government were represented before the Commission by successive agents, initially Mrs.   J. Liddy, then Department of Foreign Affairs, Dublin, and subsequently, Mr.   P. Smyth, also of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Dublin.   4.      On 14 October 1986 the European Commission of Human Rights declared admissible the applicant's complaints under Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention concerning the absence of inheritance rights on intestacy over the estates of her father and her parents' near relatives.   The remainder of her application was declared inadmissible*.   5.      The Commission then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28 of the Convention, which provides as follows:   "In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to it:   (a) it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake together with the representatives of the parties an examination of the petition and, if need be, an investigation, for the effective conduct of which the States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities, after an exchange of views with the Commission;   (b) it shall place itself at the disposal of the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in this Convention."   6.       The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 17 December 1987 it adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 30 of the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.         ___________________   *   This decision is public and can be obtained from the Commission    on request.   7.       The following members of the Commission were present when the Report was adopted:                 MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President                   J. A. FROWEIN                   G. SPERDUTI                   A. S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                   A. WEITZEL                   J. C. SOYER                   H. G. SCHERMERS                   H. DANELIUS                   G. BATLINER                   J. CAMPINOS              Sir   Basil HALL              Mr.   F. MARTINEZ              Mr.   C. L. ROZAKIS   PART I     STATEMENT OF THE FACTS     8.       The applicant was born out of wedlock in 1937.   Her natural father lived with the applicant's mother from 1936 until his death in 1975.   The applicant married in 1958 and resides, at present, in England.   9.      When her natural father died in 1975 he left an estate valued at approximately £1,600.   One of his surviving sisters applied to the probate office as next of kin for letters of administration to his estate.   On 7 October 1975 the applicant entered a caveat to that application.   Proceedings were then issued by her natural father's sister, seeking an order setting aside the caveat and granting her liberty to proceed with the application for a grant of administration. The applicant in her defence contended inter alia that she was entitled to claim a share of the estate.   In decisions of the High Court of 5 April 1982 and the Supreme Court of 20 January 1984 it was held that the applicant was not entitled to succeed on intestacy, not being "issue" within the meaning of Section 67 of the Succession Act 1965.   It was also held that Sections 67 and 69 of the 1965 Act did not infringe the principle of equality before the law guaranteed under Article 40 section 1 of the Irish Constitution.   Sections 67 and 69 of the 1965 Act regulate the distribution of an estate to members of the family when a person dies intestate.   10.      Before the Commission the applicant complained inter alia of the absence of any right of succession on the intestacy of her natural father.   She further complained of the absence of any inheritance rights on intestacy over the estates of relatives on either her mother's or her father's side.   She contended that she had been excluded from any right to succeed, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention, solely because of her status as a person born out of wedlock.   11.      On 16 May 1985 the Commission decided to bring the application to the notice of the respondent Government and to invite them to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant's complaints.   The observations of the Government were received on 26 September 1985 and the applicant's observations in reply were received on 13 November 1985.   12.      On 5 March 1986 the Commission decided to hold a hearing on the applicant's complaints under Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 concerning the absence of any inheritance rights on intestacy.   This hearing was held in Strasbourg on 14 October 1986, the applicant being represented by Mr.   K. E. O'Brien, Solicitor, Bowler, Geraghty & Co., Senator M. Robinson, S.C. and Mr.   E. Stewart, S.C.   The Government were represented by Ms.   J. Liddy, Agent, Mr.   D. Gleeson, S.C., Mr.   J. O'Reilly, Counsel and Mr.   M. Russell, Office of the Attorney General.   13.      On 17 July 1987 the applicant was granted legal aid by the Commission in respect of her legal representation. PART II     SOLUTION REACHED       14.      Following its decision on the admissibility of the application, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement, in accordance with Article 28(b) of the Convention, and invited the parties to submit any proposals they wished to make.   15.      In accordance with the usual practice the Secretary of the Commission contacted the parties and was informed that discussions were taking place between them concerning the question of legal costs and compensation.   The Secretary was also informed that the Status of Children Bill 1986, which abolishes the distinctions under Irish law between children born out of wedlock and children born within wedlock, was pending before the Irish Parliament.   16.      In a letter dated 24 July 1987 the respondent Government indicated that the discussions which had taken place between the parties concerning a possible settlement had proved unsuccessful. The Commission was invited to exercise its good offices in order to assist the parties to reach a setlement.   17.      A meeting was subsequently held in Dublin on 20 November 1987 between the representatives of the parties and the Secretary to the Commission accompanied by a member of the Secretariat.   18.      At the meeting the parties reached an agreement which they confirmed in writing to the Commission.   On 8 December 1987 the Government's Agent, Mr.   P. Smyth, addressed the following telex to the Commission:     "I have the honour to refer to the consultations which took place in Dublin, on 20 November 1987, concerning a friendly settlement in the Stoutt case and I am able to state that the Government of Ireland are prepared to make an ex gratia payment of 10,000 IR pounds to Mrs.   Mary Catherine Stoutt with a view to achieving a friendly settlement of the above application.   The Government of Ireland would recall that in the Status of Children Bill 1986, they have initiated legislation the purpose of which is to equalise the rights under the law of all children, whether born within or outside marriage.   This legislation was passed by Seanad Éireann (Upper House of Parliament) on 21 January 1987.   Subsequently the Bill was passed, with some amendments, by Dáil Éireann (Lower House of Parliament) on 18 November 1987.   The Bill, which is considered by virtue of Article 20.2.2 of the Constitution of Ireland as a Bill initiated in Dáil Éireann has been sent to Seanad Eireann for that House to consider the Provisions of the Bill further in the light of the Dáil Éireann amendments."   19.     On 15 December 1987 Mr.   K. E. O'Brien, on behalf of the applicant, sent the following telex to the Commission:     "We confirm that Mrs.   Stoutt is prepared to accept the offer of 10,000 IR pounds as a settlement of her case."     20.     At its session on 17 December 1987, the Commission found from the above letters that the parties had reached agreement on the terms of a settlement.   The Commission further found, having regard to the Status of Children Bill 1986 and Article 28 (b) of the Convention that a friendly settlement of the application had been secured on the basis of respect for human rights as defined in the Convention.           For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present report.         Secretary to the Commission             President of the Commission            (H.C. KRÜGER)                           (C. A. NØRGAARD)