PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 63701/00) against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a British national, Mr Ian Francis Thomas (“the applicant”), on 29 September 2000.

The applicant was represented by Ms P. Glynn, a lawyer practising in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C. Whomersley of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London.

By a partial decision of 4 December 2001 the Court decided to adjourn the applicant’s complaint in relation to his claims for Widow’s Benefits and Widows’ Bereavement Tax Allowance and to declare the remainder of the application inadmissible.

Subsequently, under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, the Chamber to which the case had been allocated, decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1949 and lives in Bournemouth.

His wife died on 2 November 1999. They had no children.

On 29 November 1999 and again on 17 August 2000 the applicant applied for the payment of social security survivors’ benefits, namely Widow’s Payment and Pension, with the Benefits Agency. On 3 December 1999 he was informed that he was not entitled to any benefit because he was not a woman and that he had no right of appeal since his claim had not been considered by a decision maker.

On 21 July 2000 the applicant wrote to the Benefits Agency asking for a reconsideration of his claim. On 26 July 2000 the Benefits Agency again refused his claim. The content of the letter of 3 December 1999 was reaffirmed in a letter dated 25 August 2000.

On 29 June 2001 the Benefits Agency wrote to the applicant stating that they had reconsidered the circumstances in which a formal decision should be given carrying a right of appeal and after reviewing their decision they again rejected the applicant’s claim because he was not a woman. The applicant did not appeal further as he was advised that in any case such appeal would be bound to fail.

On 13 September 2000 the applicant made a claim for Widow’s Bereavement Tax Allowance to the Inland Revenue. On 19 September 2000 he was informed that his claim could not be accepted because there was no basis in domestic law allowing widowers to claim this benefit.