CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 11 avril 1986

.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 }  The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the convention"),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali, delivered on 28 May 1985 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling that the case had its origins in three applications against the United Kingdom lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights under Article 25 (art. 25) of the convention by Mrs Nargis Abdulaziz, either stateless or a citizen of Malawi, Mrs Arcely Cabales, a citizen of the Philippines, and Mrs Sohair Balkandali, citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies, claiming as persons lawfully and permanently settled in the United Kingdom, that their husbands were refused permission to remain with them or to join them in that country, alleging to be the victims of a practice authorised by Parliament incompatible with Article 3 (art. 3), Article 8 (art. 8) taken alone and in conjunction with Article 14 and Article 13 (art. 14+8, art. 13+8) of the Convention;   Recalling that the case had been brought before the Court by the European Commission of Human Rights;   Whereas, in its judgment of 28 May 1985, the Court unanimously held:   - that Article 8 (art. 8) was applicable in the present case but that, taken alone, it had not been violated;   - that Article 14 (art. 14) was applicable in the present case;   - that Article 14 taken together with Article 8 (art. 14+8) had been violated by reason of discrimination against each of the applicants on the ground of sex;   - that there had been no other violation of Article 14 taken together with Article 8 (art. 14+8);   - that there had been no breach of Article 3 (art. 3);   - that there had been a violation of Article 13 (art. 13) in regard to the complaint of discrimination on the ground of sex;   - that the United Kingdom was to pay to the applicants jointly, for costs and expenses, the sums resulting from the calculations to be made in accordance with paragraph 100 of the judgment;   Having regard to the "Rules concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the convention";   Having invited the Government of the United Kingdom to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment, having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the convention to abide by the judgment;   Whereas, during the examination of this case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the United Kingdom informed the Committee of Ministers of the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information is summarised at the appendix to this resolution;   Having satisfied itself that the Government of the United Kingdom has paid the applicants the sum provided for in the judgment of the Court of 28 May 1985,   Declares, after taking note of the information supplied by the Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its function under Article 54 (art. 54) of the convention in this case.   Appendix to Resolution DH (86) 2   Information provided by the Government of the United Kingdom during the examination of the case of Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali before the Committee of Ministers   Following the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 28 May 1985 the Government has made changes to the Immigration Rules to put the provisions regulating the admission of husbands and wives seeking admission to or leave to remain in the United Kingdom on the basis of marriage to spouses settled in the United Kingdom on the same basis.   The new provisions came into effect on 26 August 1985.   The new rules remove the difference of treatment between husbands and wives which the Court found to be in violation of Article 14 taken with Article 8 (art. 14+8) of the European Convention.   The new rules contain a saving for section 1.5 of the Immigration Act 1971 which requires the Immigration Rules to preserve the position of wives of Commonwealth citizens who were settled in the United Kingdom when the 1971 Act came into force.   The United Kingdom Government expect to introduce legislation amending this transitional provision.   The new provisions in the Immigration Rules are compatible with the European Convention.   No complaint of violation can be made by reason of the relationship between the rules and the convention.   Domestic legislation provides remedies for complaints of misapplication of the rules.   The Government of the United Kingdom has paid to the applicants the sums ordered to be paid by way of costs and expenses in the Court's judgment of 28 May 1985.