Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 14 or Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicant had wanted to complain of discrimination on religious grounds under the Act to an Fair Employment Tribunal. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland issued a certificate under the section that he had been dismissed to protect public safety and public order, and that his claim was not to be entertained. He applied to the ECHR complaining that the Act denied him the right to a fair hearing.
Held: The interference with his Article 6 rights was disproportionate and unlawful. Though states had a margin of appreciation, with interference with an individual’s rights, limitations must not restrict or reduce the access left to the individual so that the very essence of the right was impaired. No explanation for the certificate had been or was to be given.
Times 11-Apr-2002, 24265/94, [2002] ECHR 310
Worldlii, Bailii
Fair Employment (Northern Ireland) Act 1976 42, European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Citing:
Cited – Tinnelly and Sons Ltd and Others and McElduff and Others v United Kingdom ECHR 10-Jul-1998
Legislation which disallowed claimants who asserted that they had been discriminated against, on the grounds of their religious background, from appealing through the courts system, was a clear breach of their human rights. A limitation will not be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 September 2021; Ref: scu.168045