Crompton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 27 Oct 2009

The applicant had joined the Territorial Army as a pay and accounts clerk but was made redundant. He claimed redress in respect of his redundancy from his Commanding Officer. There then followed a prolonged series of proceedings which took eleven years to reach their conclusion before he achieved a settlement of his claim. He contended that this was a breach of his right to a hearing within a reasonable time under article 6(1). The Government accepted that his civil rights were determined in the civil proceedings and that article 6 was applicable.
‘The Court has previously held that in order to determine whether the article 6-compliant second-tier tribunal had ‘full jurisdiction’, or provided ‘sufficiency of review’ to remedy a lack of independence at first instance, it was necessary to have regard to such factors as the subject-matter of the decision appealed against, the manner in which that decision was arrived at and the content of the dispute, including the desired and actual grounds of appeal.’
42509/05, [2009] ECHR 1659, (2010) 50 EHRR 36
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Citing:
Statement of FactsCrompton v The United Kingdom 13-May-2008
(date) Statement of Facts . .

Cited by:
CitedTomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that . .
CitedMolaudi v Ministry of Defence EAT 15-Apr-2011
molaudi_modEAT11
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS
The Claimant sought to bring a claim for racial discrimination against the defendant relating to events which occurred while the Claimant was a serving soldier. He had previously . .
JudgmentCrompton v The United Kingdom ECHR 14-Sep-2011
Supervision of execution of final judgments. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 February 2021; Ref: scu.377275