CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 8 janvier 1992

.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. 15397/89 by A.P. against United Kingdom   The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 8 January 1992, the following members being present:   MM.C.A. NØRGAARD, President S. TRECHSEL F. ERMACORA G. SPERDUTI E. BUSUTTIL G. JÖRUNDSSON A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK A. WEITZEL J.-C. SOYER H.G. SCHERMERS H. DANELIUS Mrs.G. H. THUNE SirBasil HALL MM.F. MARTINEZ RUIZ C.L. ROZAKIS Mrs.J. LIDDY MM.L. LOUCAIDES J.-C. GEUS M.P. PELLONPÄÄ B. MARXER   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 21 April 1989 by A.P. against the United Kingdom and registered on 5 August 1989 under file No. 15397/89;   Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;   Having deliberated;   Decides as follows:               THE FACTS   The applicant is a British citizen born in 1973.   He lives in Redditch and is represented before the Commission by Ms. Rachel Hodgkin of the Children's Legal Centre, London.   The facts, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.   During the period October 1985 to March 1988 the applicant had been convicted of a number of property and motoring offences.   For these offences he had received a conditional discharge, a supervision order, a fine, an attendance centre order, a care order and had had his driving licence endorsed.   On 9 November 1988 at the age of 14, the applicant pleaded guilty to taking and driving away two cars and to burglary of a school. A welfare report to the court recommended intensive support in a supervised activities centre under the supervision order.   Section 1 of the Criminal Justice Act 1982, as supplemented by the Criminal Justice Act 1988, provides, as far as relevant, as follows:   "1. General restrictions on custodial sentences   (4) A court may not-   (a) pass a sentence of detention in a young offender institution; ... unless it is satisfied-   (i) that the circumstances, including the nature and the gravity of the offence, are such that if the offender were aged 21 or over the court would pass a sentence of imprisonment; and   (ii) that he qualifies for a custodial sentence.   (4A) An offender qualifies for a custodial sentence if-     (a) he has a history of failure to respond to non-custodial       penalties and is unable or unwilling to respond to them;       ...       1A Detention in a young offender institution (I) Subject to Section 8 below and to Section 53 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, where-   (a) a male offender under 21 but not less than 14 years of age or a female offender under 21 but not less than 15 years of age is convicted of an offence which is punishable with imprisonment in the case of a person aged 21 or over; and   (b) the court is satisfied of the matters referred to in Section (4) above, the sentence that the court is to pass is a sentence of detention in a young offender institution....     1B Special provision for offenders under 17 (I) In the case of a male offender under 15 the maximum term of detention in a young offender institution that a court may impose is whichever is the lesser of-   (a) the maximum term of imprisonment the court may impose for the offence; and   (b) 4 months."   The applicant was sentenced to a 3 months' custodial sentence at a young offender institution.   He was detained for 6 weeks at Campsfield House young offender institution at Kidlington.     COMPLAINTS   The applicant contends that, under English law, boys but not girls of 14 years of age may be sentenced to imprisonment in a young offender institution for up to 4 months for the commission of many types of offences, including theft.   He alleges that if he had been a girl, he could not have been deprived of his liberty in the way he was, and that he has therefore been treated in a manner different from a comparable female offender.   He considers that the difference in treatment was based upon sex and had no objective reasonable justification.   The applicant alleges a violation of Article 14 of the Convention taken together with Article 5.     PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION   The application was introduced on 21 April 1989 and registered on 5 August 1989.   On 4 December 1989 the Commission decided to communicate the application to the Government and to ask for written observations on the admissibility and merits of the application.   The Government's observations were submitted on 14 March 1990 after one extension in the time-limit and the applicant's observations in reply were submitted on 17 July 1990 after two extensions in the time-limit.   By letter dated 11 November 1991, the applicant's representative informed the Commission that the applicant had agreed to settle the case in light of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 which abolishes short custodial sentences for 14 year old boys and for an ex gratia payment of £75 with reasonable legal costs.     REASONS FOR THE DECISION   The Commission notes that the parties have agreed to settle the case on the basis of a proposal of £75 and reasonable costs and in light of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 which now abolishes custodial detention in respect of 14 year old boys.   In these circumstances the Commission finds that the applicant does not intend to pursue his application before the Commission since the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 30 para. 1 (a) and (b) of the Convention.   The Commission further considers that respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention does not require it to continue the examination of the application.   It follows that the application may be struck off the list of cases pursuant to Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention.   For these reasons, the Commission unanimously,   DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF THE LIST OF CASES       Secretary to the Commission                 President of the Commission           (H. C. KRÜGER)                                  (C. A. NØRGAARD)