CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 27 septembre 2022

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Legal summary October 2022 N.A. v. the United Kingdom (communicated case) - 28540/20   Article 8 Article 8-1 Respect for family life Respect for private life Investigation into complaint of sexual misconduct against member of House of Lords: communicated Article 14 Discrimination Alleged absence of judicial remedy for members of the House of Lords and Members of Parliament accused of sexual misconduct: communicated In or around 2020, an investigation into a sexual misconduct complaint against the applicant, a life peer and member of the House of Lords (being the upper house of the United Kingdom Parliament), was carried out by the House of Lords Commissioner for Standards (“the Commissioner”). The Commissioner concluded that the applicant had breached the House of Lords Code of Conduct and recommended his expulsion from the House of Lords. The applicant appealed unsuccessfully to the Conduct Committee of the House of Lords. He resigned before any action was taken to expel him. The applicant complains that the Commissioner’s report had devastating consequences for his private and family life, and that the process for investigating and punishing breaches of the House of Lords Code of Conduct did not afford due respect to the interests safeguarded under Article 8. In particular, he complains that he had no right to cross-examine the complainant, even though the allegations were serious and the complainant’s credibility was in issue. He also alleges that on account of “parliamentary privilege” the courts had neither appellate nor supervisory jurisdiction in respect of the Commissioner’s investigation. Lastly, he complains under Article 8, read together with Article 14, that only members of the House of Lords and Members of Parliament were denied a remedy in a court or tribunal in the event of their being accused of sexual misconduct. Communicated under Article 8 and Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 8.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. To access legal summaries in English or French click here . For non-official translations into other languages click here .