Application No. 11756/85
by G.S.
against the United Kingdom

        The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on
13 March 1989, the following members being present:

                MM.  C.A. NØRGAARD, President
                     S. TRECHSEL
                     F. ERMACORA
                     G. SPERDUTI
                     E. BUSUTTIL
                     A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
                     A. WEITZEL
                     J.C. SOYER
                     H.G. SCHERMERS
                     H. DANELIUS
                     G. BATLINER
                     J. CAMPINOS
                     H. VANDENBERGHE
                Mrs.  G.H. THUNE
                Sir  Basil HALL
                MM.  F. MARTINEZ
                     C.L. ROZAKIS
                Mrs.  J. LIDDY
                Mr.  L. LOUCAIDES

                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 26 October
1982 by Greogry SWAN against the United Kingdom and registered on
19 September 1985 under file No. 11756/85;

- ii -


        Having regard to:

     -  reports provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure of
        the Commission;

     -  the Commission's decision of 17 July 1986 to bring the
        application to the notice of the respondent Government
        and invite them to submit written observations on its
        admissibility and merits ;

     -  the observations submitted by the respondent Government on
        5 August 1987 and 5 February 1988, upon which the applicant
        had no comment ;

     -  the Commission's partial decision on admissibility of
        10 October 1988 and its decision to request further
        observations from the Government on admissibility and
        merits ;

     -  the proposals submitted by the Government on 17 January 1989 ;

     -  the response of the applicant on 17 February 1989 ;

        Having deliberated;

        Decides as follows:

        The applicant is a citizen of the United Kingdom, born in
1969 and resident in W., England.  He is represented before the
Commission by his mother and Messrs.  Wilford McBain, solicitors,

        He complained to the Commission of severe corporal punishment
he had received in an English State school.  The teacher concerned was
unsuccessfully prosecuted, during which time he was suspended from his
job but, subsequently, on his acquittal, re-instated with a formal
disciplinary warning.  By that time the applicant had been removed
from the school.  Civil proceedings for assault were settled out of
court with a £300 payment.  The applicant originally claimed to have
been a victim of a violation of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.


        The application was originally introduced by the applicant,
together with his mother as applicant, on 26 October 1982 when his
representatives wrote to the Secretary to the Commission submitting
details of the complaints.  An application form was sent to them on
16 November 1982, with the request that it should be returned, duly
completed.  The applicant's solicitors' next letter was dated
5 September 1985, when the application form was returned.  It was
received on 19 September 1985 and registered on that date.

        After a preliminary examination of the case by a Rapporteur,
the Commission examined the case on 17 July 1986 but then adjourned
it.  It renewed its examination of the case on 12 March 1987 and
decided to give notice of the application, pursuant to Rule 42(2)(b)
of its Rules of Procedure, to the respondent Government.

        On 5 August 1987, after an extension of the time-limit, the
Government expressed their wish to resolve the application by virtue
of the abolition of corporal punishment in State schools by the
Education (No. 2) Act 1986, which came into force on 15 August 1987,
in view of the fact that the applicant's mother had stated in the
application to the Commission that its object was, inter alia, to
obtain a reform of the domestic law.  The applicant submitted no
response to the Government's proposal.

        On 12 December 1987 the Commission decided to invite the
respondent Government to make specific proposals for the resolution of
the case.  However on 5 February 1988 the Government submitted written
observations on the admissibility of the application.  On 29 April
1988 the applicant's representatives informed the Commission that the
applicant relied on the submissions in the original application and
had no further observations to make.

        On 10 October 1988 the Commission declared the mother's part
of the application inadmissible and requested the Government to submit
further observations, pursuant to Rule 42(3)(a) of its Rules of
Procedure, concerning the son's part of the application.

        On 17 January 1989 the Government submitted further proposals
for the resolution of the application:  Drawing attention to the
reform of the English law regarding State school corporal punishment
and the £300 already obtained by the applicant through civil
proceedings, they offered an ex gratia payment of £2,700.  On
17 February 1989 the applicant's representatives informed the
Commission that their client accepted the offer and wished to withdraw
the case.


        The Commission notes the Government's offer to resolve the
application by the ex gratia payment of £2,700 and the applicant's
acceptance of that proposal and his wish to withdraw the case.  The
Commission finds, in view of the reform of the English law on State
school corporal punishment, that the application presents no reasons
of a general character affecting the observance of the Convention
which require its retention.  In these circumstances, the Commission
accedes to the applicant's request to withdraw  his case.

        For these reasons, the Commission


Secretary to the Commission        President of the Commission

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