CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 6 décembre 2012

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s5EE9E87A { font-size:6.67pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s22F01CEB { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-18pt } .s37D58556 { width:14.67pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s284C023A { font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s7A64F404 { text-decoration:underline } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sBE30FE25 { text-align:justify; font-weight:bold; list-style-position:inside } .s38F34D94 { width:22.66pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s90A93616 { width:27.66pt; display:inline-block } .s74493265 { margin-top:0pt; margin-right:11.25pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .s846B54EF { font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)231 [1] J.M. against United Kingdom Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights   (Application No. 37060/06, judgment of 28 September 2010, final on 28 December 2010)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Having regard to the final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in the above case and to the violation established (see document DH-DD(2012)937E );   Recalling that the respondent State’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide to by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:   -           of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and -           of general measures preventing similar violations;   Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its above-mentioned obligation;   Having examined the action report provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2012)937E );   Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted;   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and   DECIDES to close the examination thereof. Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Action Report   JM v The United Kingdom (application no . 37060/06; judgment final on 28/12/2010) Information submitted by the United Kingdom Government on 10 October 2011   Case Summary                   Case description   The case involved an absent mother who was in a same sex relationship. As the non resident parent she was required to contribute towards her children’s upbringing and in 2001 the relevant legislation provided for a reduced amount when the absent parent was in a relationship, but took no account of same sex relationships.   The European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR.   Individual Measures   2.   Just satisfaction :   The just satisfaction award has been paid; evidence attached.   General Measures   3.   General measures :   The Government considers no further general measures are necessary because the discrimination complaint in this case has already been resolved by means of legislation – the Civil Partnership Act 2004 and subordinate legislation. This amended the relevant legislation to provide that, in the relevant situation, same sex relationships are taken into account in an equivalent way to relationships between persons of the opposite sex.   4.   Publication :   The judgment has been published in:   - All England Law Reports: [2010] All ER (D) 51 (Oct) http://lexisweb.co.uk/cases/2010/September/JM-v-United-Kingdom   - British and Irish Legal Information Institute Database: [2010] ECHR 1361 http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/1361.html   5.   Dissemination :   - The Government considers it is unnecessary to disseminate the judgment because the law has already been changed (in fact, some considerable time ago – Civil Partnerships Act 2004 and subordinate legislation) and so highlighting the previous legislation would be unnecessary and confusing.   - The Government considers that all necessary measures have been taken and the case should be closed.   [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 December 2012 at the 1157th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.