CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 11 mai 1988

.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. 11672/85 by Linda BUCKLAND and Mark BUCKLAND against the United Kingdom             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 11 May 1988, the following members being present:                   MM.   C.A. NØRGAARD, President                      J.A. FROWEIN                      S. TRECHSEL                      G. SPERDUTI                      E. BUSUTTIL                      G. JÖRUNDSSON                      A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                      A. WEITZEL                      J.C. SOYER                      H.G. SCHERMERS                      H. DANELIUS                      G. BATLINER                      H. VANDENBERGHE                 Mrs.   G.H. THUNE                 Sir   Basil HALL                 MM.   F. MARTINEZ                      C.L. ROZAKIS                 Mrs.   J. LIDDY                   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 1 August 1985 by Linda BUCKLAND and Mark BUCKLAND against the United Kingdom and registered on 5 August 1985 under file No. 11672/85;           Having regard to:        -   reports provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure         of the Commission;        -   the Commission's decision of 12 March 1987 to bring         the application to the notice of the respondent Government         and invite them to submit written observations on its         admissibilty and merits;     - ii -              -   the proposal put forward by the Government on 3 February 1988;        -   the qualified acceptance of that proposal by the applicants'         representatives on 6 and 22 April 1988;           Having deliberated;           Decides as follows:     THE FACTS           The applicants, United Kingdom citizens, are mother and son living in Bedfordshire.   The second applicant was born in 1968.   They are represented before the Commission by Messrs.   Binks, Stern and Partners, Solicitors, London.           On 1 July 1983, prior to taking an academic examination, the second applicant, then aged 15, was given one stroke of the cane on the bottom by his state school headmaster for insolence towards a teacher.   The caning brought tears to the boy's eyes and left a weal and bruising to the skin.   He became quiet and withdrawn for some time after the incident.     COMPLAINTS           The applicants complained to the Commission that the corporal punishment was in breach of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention.     PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION           The application was introduced on 1 August 1985 and registered on 5 August 1985.           After a preliminary examination of the case by the Rapporteur, the Commission considered the admissibility of the application on 12 March 1987.   It decided, pursuant to Rule 42 para. 2 (b) of its Rules of Procedure, to give notice of the application to the respondent Government and to invite the parties to submit their written observations on its admissibility and merits.           However, observations were not submitted and the Government expressed the wish on 5 August 1987 to explore the possibility of resolving the case.           The Commission decided on 12 December 1987 to suspend the proceedings and to invite the Government to make specific proposals for the resolution of the application.           On 3 February 1988 the Government made the following offer: The Government recalled the provisions of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 and the abolition of corporal punishment in United Kingdom state schools.   Moreover, without prejudice to their position on the merits of the application, they proposed an ex gratia payment of £3000 to the applicants.           The applicants' representatives responded on 6 April 1988 accepting the offer of £3000, but adding a request for the payment of reasonable legal costs.   Nevertheless, the applicants' representatives stressed that if, in spite of arguments they   had advanced in support of this latter claim, the Commission felt that the Government's offer was reasonable, the applicants would be prepared to accept it.           By letter of 19 April 1988 the Government stated that their offer consisted of a global ex gratia payment which in their view was, in all the circumstances, reasonable.             The applicants' representatives responded on 22 April 1988 requesting the Commission to decide the matter, whilst emphasising that the Government's offer had not been rejected by their clients.     REASONS FOR THE DECISION           The Commission notes the Government's offer of a global ex gratia sum of £3000 to resolve this application.   It also notes that the applicants have not rejected this offer, should the Commission consider it reasonable.   The Commission finds the Government's offer adequate in all the circumstances of the case.   Accordingly, the applicants may be deemed to have accepted it.   Furthermore, the Commission considers, given the reform of the law on corporal punishment in state schools, that there are no reasons of a general character affecting the observance of the Convention which necessitate the further retention of this case.   The Commission, therefore, concludes that the issues in the case are resolved and that, in the circumstances, the applicants do not intend to pursue this application (Rule 44 para. 1 (b) of the Commission's Rules of Procedure). (Rule 44-1-b)           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. KRÜGER)                         (C.A. NØRGAARD)