The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on
13 May 1986, the following members being present:

              MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President
                  J. A. FROWEIN
                  F. ERMACORA
                  E. BUSUTTIL
                  G. JÖRUNDSSON
                  S. TRECHSEL
                  B. KIERNAN
                  A. WEITZEL
                  J. C. SOYER
                  H. G. SCHERMERS
                  H. DANELIUS
                  G. BATLINER
             Mrs. G. H. THUNE
             Sir  Basil HALL

              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 (art. 25);

Having regard to the application introduced on 26 February 1985 by R.A. against
the United Kingdom and registered on 4 March 1986 under file No. 11413/85;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of
Procedure of the Commission;

Having regard to:

-       the Commission's decision of 9 October 1985 to bring the
        applicationto the notice of the respondent Government but
        not to invite them to submit observations on its admissibility
        at this stage and to adjourn the application pending the
        Judgment of the Court in the case of James and Others

-       the Commission's decision of 8 March 1986 to ask the applicant
        pursuant to Rule 42 para. 2(a) whether he wishes to pursue his
        application in view of the judgment in the case of James
        and Others;

-       the applicant's reply of 14 April 1986.

        Having deliberated;

        Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The facts as they have been submitted on behalf of the applicant, a
British citizen born in 1921 and resident in Fife, Scotland, by his
representatives, Messrs. J.C. and A. Steuart, W.S., Solicitors, of
Edinburgh, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant is proprietor of the Estate of Watten and South Dunn in
the County of Caithness in Scotland and landlord of the properties
which are the subject of this application and which form part of this
Estate.

In September 1984 the applicant agreed to sell part of his Estate
known as Knapperfield to the tenant, S., such sale including the site
of S.'s dwelling house at Knapperfield.  The farm of Knapperfield is a
registered croft under the Crofters Acts 1955 and 1961 and as such the
sale was subject to the terms of the Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act
1976 ("the 1976 Act").  Section 1 of the 1976 Act gives a crofter the
right to require the landlord to convey to him both the croft tenanted
by him and the site of any dwelling house on such croft.  Section 4 of
the 1976 Act entitles the crofter to seek an order as to the terms of
such conveyance from the Land Court failing agreement with the
landlord.  Section 4 (2)(a) provides that the consideration payable
for the conveyance of the site of the dwelling house shall be:

"4 (2)(a)  the amount as determined by the Land Court which the site,
if sold in the open market by a willing seller, might be expected to
realise assuming that -

(i)  there were or would be no buildings on the site;

(ii)  the site were available with vacant possession;

(iii)  the site were not land to which the Crofters (Scotland) Acts
1955 and 1961 apply; and

(iv)  no development of the site were or would be permitted in
pursuance of the Town and County Planning (Scotland) Act 1972."

In view of the terms of the 1976 Act the applicant and S. agreed upon
a price for the croft and the dwelling house and the portion of this
price which related to the site of the dwelling house was £5.

In December 1984 the applicant agreed to sell two further crofts to
the tenant M.  This sale included the site of the dwelling house, and
the proportion of the sale price referable to the dwelling house
pursuant to the provisions of the 1976 Act was agreed between the
parties to be £5.

On 17 December 1985 the applicant's representative informed the
Commission of two further sales under the 1976 Act, the first on 20
December 1984 and the second on 26 November 1985.  The latter
transaction did not involve the sale of a dwelling house.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains that the effect of the 1976 Act as it applies
to him is to compel him to sell his property contrary to his wishes
and to Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1).  He also contends that the
operation of the 1976 Act is discriminatory contrary to Article 14 of
the Convention (art. 14) and that he has no remedy under Scots law for
these alleged violations of the Convention contrary to Article 13
(art. 13).

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 26 February 1985 and registered
on 4 March 1985.

On 9 October 1985 the Commission decided to give notice of the
application to the respondent Government pursuant to Rule 42
para. 2(b) of the Rules of Procedure without requesting observations
at that stage and to adjourn its examination of the application
pending the judgment of the Court in the case of James and Others.

The Court's judgment was given in that case on 21 February 1986 and on
8 March 1986 the Commission decided to ask the applicant, pursuant to
Rule 42 para. 2(a) of its Rules of Procedure, whether he wished to
pursue his application in the light of the Court's judgment in that
case.

On 14 April 1986 the applicant's representatives informed the
Commission that, in the light of the Court's decision in the case of
James and Others, the applicant does not wish to pursue his
application.

FINDING OF THE COMMISSION

The applicant complained that the right for tenants to purchase the
croft farms which they rented from the applicant under the terms of
the 1976 Act was in breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1)
and Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention (art. 13, art. 14).

However, in view of the Court's judgment in the case of James and
Others, the applicant has informed the Commission that he wishes to
withdraw his application.

The Commission finds that the applicant does not wish to maintain his
application and that there are no reasons of a general character
affecting the observance of the Convention which necessitate a further
examination of the case.

For these reasons, the Commission

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES

Secretary to the Commission            President of the Commission

    (H. C. KRÜGER)                         (C. A. NØRGAARD)