Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
The case originated in an application (no. 34462/97) against the Kingdom of the Netherlands lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights (“the Commission”) under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Dutch national, R.E.W. Wessels-Bergervoet (“the applicant”), on 11 October 1996.
In a judgment delivered on 4 June 2002 (“the principal judgment”), the Court held that there was no objective and reasonable justification for the difference in treatment between married women and married men as regards entitlement to benefits under the General Old Age Pension Act ( Algemene Ouderdomswet ; “AOW”) and that, therefore, there had been a violation of Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 ( Wessels-Bergervoet v. the Netherlands , no. 34462/97, §§ 46-55, ECHR 2002-IV).
Under Article 41 of the Convention the applicant sought just satisfaction for pecuniary damage in a total amount of 94,175.80 euros (EUR) for loss of AOW benefits between 1 March 1989 and 1 January 2001. This amount included a claim for legal interest over that period and for future loss of income resulting from the reduction of her AOW pension. The applicant further claimed EUR 4,537.80 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 8,326.66 for legal costs incurred.
Since the question of the application of Article 41 of the Convention was not ready for decision, the Court reserved it and invited the Government and the applicant to submit, within three months, their written observations on that issue and, in particular, to notify the Court of any agreement they might reach (ibid., § 64 and point 2 of the operative provisions).
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.