CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 16 mai 2000

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sD35C6159 { width:1.54pt; display:inline-block } .sF9A986A5 { width:12.2pt; display:inline-block } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s5E15F1C8 { width:0.33pt; display:inline-block } .sC5412BEF { width:51.05pt; display:inline-block } .s85016119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:11pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   342   16.5.2000   Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARING IN THE CASE OF HATTON AND OTHERS v. UNITED KINGDOM   Tuesday, 16 May 2000, at 2. p.m.   The applicants   The eight applicants, all British citizens, live or lived in properties in the area surrounding Heathrow Airport, London. They are: Ruth Hatton, born in 1963 and living in East Sheen; Peter Thake, born in 1965 and living in Hounslow; John Hartley, born in 1948 and living in Richmond; Philippa Edmunds, born in 1954 and living in East Twickenham; John Cavalla, born in 1925 who, from 1970 to 1996, lived in Isleworth; Jeffray Thomas, born in 1928 and living in Kew; Richard Bird, born in 1933 and living in Windsor and Tony Anderson, born in 1932 and living in Touchen End.   Summary of the facts   Before October 1993 the noise caused by night flying at Heathrow had been controlled through restrictions on the total number of take-offs and landings; but after that date, noise was regulated through a system of noise quotas, which assigned each aircraft type a "Quota Count" (QC), the noisier the aircraft the higher the QC. This allowed aircraft operators to select a greater number of quieter aeroplanes or fewer noisier aeroplanes, provided the noise quota was not exceeded. The new scheme imposed these controls strictly between 11.30 p.m. to 6 a.m. with more lenient "shoulder periods” allowed from 11-11.30pm and 6-7am. Previously, strict controls were imposed during a longer period.   Following an application for   judicial review brought by the local authorities affected, the scheme was found to be contrary to section 78 (3) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982, which required that a precise number of aircraft be specified, as opposed to a noise quota. The Government therefore included a limit on the number of aircraft movements allowed at night. A second judicial review found that the Government’s consultation exercise concerning the scheme had been conducted unlawfully and in March and June 1995 the Government issued further consultation papers. On 16 August 1995 the Secretary of State for Transport announced that the details of the new scheme would be as previously announced. The decision was challenged unsuccessfully by the local authorities.   Complaints   The applicants complain, among other things, that following the introduction of the new scheme night-time noise increased, especially in the early morning, which interfered with their right to respect for their private and family lives and their homes, guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.   They also complain that Section 76 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 acts as a procedural bar to bringing a claim before the courts in respect of unreasonable aircraft noise and that there was no fair hearing or impartial public inquiry process to examine the Government’s regulatory schemes, in breach of Article 6 (access to a court). They further claim that judicial review is not an effective remedy within the meaning of Article 13, as it fails to examine the merits of decisions by public authorities and is prohibitively expensive for individuals.     Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 6 May 1997. The case was transmitted to the European Court of Human Rights on 1 November 1998. The hearing before the Court concerns the admissibility of the application.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (French), President , Loukis Loucaides (Cypriot), Pranas Kūris (Lithuanian), Françoise Tulkens (Belgian), Karel Jungwiert (Czech), Hanne Sophie Greve (Norwegian), judges , Sir Brian Kerr (British), ad hoc judge , Willi Fuhrmann (Austrian), Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Mindia Ugrekhelidze (Georgian), substitute judges ,   and also Sally Dollé , Section Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government:   Huw Llewellyn , Agent , James Eadie , Counsel , Paul Reardon , Adviser ;   Applicants:   David Anderson QC, Counsel , Richard Buxton , Solicitor, Susan Ring , Solicitor, Colin Stanbury , Adviser .   The applicants Ms Hatton, Mr Thomas, and Mr Anderson will also attend the hearing.   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date.   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court.