M. v. the United Kingdom



AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 16778/90

by M.

against the United Kingdom

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 11 October 1990, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

J.A. FROWEIN

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

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ RUIZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

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 5 April 1990

by M. against the United Kingdom and registered on 22 June 1990

under file No. 16778/90;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the

Rules of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

The applicant is a British citizen born in 1937 and resident

in L.

Following the loss of his job in 1981, the applicant

experienced difficulty in paying his rates to L. City Council.

On 15 July 1988, the applicant was committed to prison for six weeks

for non-payment of his rates by Leeds Magistrates Court. The

applicant alleges that while in prison he was assaulted by prisoners

and staff and wrongly classified as a criminal rather than a civil

prisoner for a period of 2 - 3 weeks with resulting loss of

privileges.

The applicant's solicitors applied for legal aid to pursue a

claim for wrongful imprisonment. Legal aid was refused on

6 November 1989 on the ground that it did not appear that the

applicant could successfully proceed against the Leeds Magistrates Court.

The applicant complains inter alia of being subjected to

degrading treatment as a result of his detention, of being wrongly

imprisoned, of failing to receive a fair hearing before the

Magistrates Court and of censorship of his correspondence in prison.

He invokes Articles 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Convention.

The Commission has examined the applicant's separate

complaints as they have been submitted by him. However, after

considering the case as a whole, the Commission finds that it does not

disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set

out in the Convention.

It follows that the application is as a whole manifestly

ill-founded within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 of the

Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H. C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)