WINGRAVE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - 40029/02 [2005] ECHR 789 (29 November 2005)

WINGRAVE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - 40029/02 [2005] ECHR 789 (29 November 2005)

The Court found that the friendly settlement reached between the parties was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols, and therefore struck the case out of the list.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] ECHR 789
Parties
Applicant: Alberta Pamela Wingrave (deceased, continued by executors); Respondent: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Jurisdiction
European Union
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Friendly Settlement After Admissibility, Before Final Judgment
Outcome
Case struck out of the list following friendly settlement
Legal Topics
Right to a Fair Trial, Delay in Judicial Proceedings, Disability Benefits, Friendly Settlement
Human Rights Law Social Security Law Right to a Fair Trial Delay in Judicial Proceedings Disability Benefits Friendly Settlement

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alberta Pamela Wingrave (deceased, continued by executors)

Applicant

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Friendly Settlement After Admissibility, Before Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the delay in deciding the applicant's claim for disability allowances violated Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the friendly settlement reached between the parties was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols, and therefore struck the case out of the list.

Court Disposition

Case struck out of the list following friendly settlement

Orders

  • Case struck out of the list
  • Parties undertook not to request a rehearing before the Grand Chamber