European Court of Human Rights

FOURTH SECTION

FINAL DECISION

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application no. 28111/02
by Jeffrey WRIGHT
against the United Kingdom

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 14 October 2008 as a Chamber composed of:

Lech Garlicki, President,
Nicolas Bratza,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Ledi Bianku,
Mihai Poalelungi, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 March 2001,

Having regard to the partial decision of 12 November 2002,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Jeffrey Wright, is a British national who was born in 1948 and lives in Liverpool. He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C. Whomersley of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

A.  The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant's wife died on 5 July 1991. On 17 August 2000 the applicant applied for widows' benefits. On 20 August 2000 the applicant was informed that his claim had been disallowed. Reconsideration took place on 20 August 2000 and on 12 September 2000 the applicant was informed that the previous decision had been upheld. On 24 January 2001 the appeal tribunal confirmed this decision. The applicant did not appeal further as he considered or was advised that such a remedy would be bound to fail since no such social security benefit was payable to widowers under United Kingdom law.

B.  Relevant domestic law

The domestic law relevant to this application is set out in Willis v. the United Kingdom, no. 36042/97, §§ 14 26, ECHR 2002-IV and Runkee and White v. the United Kingdom, no. 42949/98, §§ 40-41, 25 July 2007.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complained that British social security legislation discriminated against him on grounds of sex, in breach of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with both Article 8 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

THE LAW

On 18 May 2006 the Registry of the Court sent the applicant's representative a letter requesting the applicant to provide it with information regarding his case by 2 June 2006. The applicant's representative replied stating they had not received the requested information from the applicant. By a letter of 6 July 2006 the Registry of the Court sent the applicant's representative a letter requesting them to inform the Court about the progress made in reaching a friendly settlement by 30 July 2006. The applicant's representative did not reply. On 12 August 2008 the Registry of the Court sent the applicant's representative another letter by registered mail stating that unless he submitted the required information by 26 August 2008, the Court would consider striking out the application from the list for lack of interest. The applicant's representative has not contacted the Court since.

In the light of the above, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court considers that the applicant does not intend to pursue his application. Furthermore, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols which require the continuation of the examination of the application.

Accordingly, the remainder of the application should be struck out of the Court's list of cases.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the remainder of the application out of its list of cases.

Lawrence Early Lech Garlicki
Registrar President