Campbell and Cosans v. the United Kingdom | 1982

Teachers stop hitting children after Scottish mums complain to Strasbourg

The duty to respect parental convictions in this sphere cannot be overridden by the alleged necessity of striking a balance between the conflicting views involved, nor is the Government’s policy to move gradually towards the abolition of corporal punishment in itself sufficient.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, February 1982 - Pictured: Grace Campbell

Background

Grace Campbell and Jane Cosans both had children in state schools in Scotland, where staff were allowed to hit pupils with a leather strap for disciplinary reasons.

Grace asked her local council for a guarantee that corporal punishment would not be used against her seven-year-old son, Gordon. The council would not give her such a guarantee.

Jane’s son Jeffrey, who was 15, refused to accept corporal punishment for taking a short cut through a cemetery on his way home. He was suspended from school, and never returned.

The two mothers complained to the European Court of Human Rights.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The European court ruled that corporal punishment had not actually been used against the two children, who had not suffered torture or inhuman or degrading treatment.

However, by allowing corporal punishment to be used in state schools the authorities had violated the women’s right to have their children educated in line with their own philosophical convictions.

When you strip it away, what you’re really talking about is hitting another individual.

Grace Campbell’s son Andrew, speaking to the BBC

Follow-up

In 1986, the British government introduced a new Education Act abolishing corporal punishment in state schools. The law entered into force the following year.

Grace Campbell and Jane Cossans received money towards their legal costs and expenses, and Jeffrey Cossans was paid £3,000 in damages.

Additional information

Themes:

Related examples

Reforms made following the inhuman treatment of a four-year-old girl

When she was four years old, Tabitha Mitunga was held by the Belgian authorities for almost two months – without family, friends, or anybody to look after her. She suffered psychological damage and the European court ruled that her rights had been violated. Her case highlighted the need for better protections for unaccompanied children in Belgium and led to substantial reforms.

Themes: Right to family life Freedom from torture and ill-treatment

Belgium

Father wins battle to see his son - and rights for all Czech parents

When Vladimír Zavřel’s wife left the family home, she took the couple’s six-year-old son and stopped Vladimír seeing him. Vladimír got a court order for contact with his boy, but the authorities failed to enforce it. The European court ruled that this had violated the right to family life. Contact was re-established and the law was changed to prevent similar situations happening again.

Themes: Right to family life

Czechia

Reforms made after mother lost custody of her children simply because of her religion

Ingrid Hoffmann was a Jehovah’s Witness. When she got divorced, a child psychologist advised that she should be given custody of her children, because of their close bond. However, an Austrian court ruled that the father should get custody, because of Ingrid’s religion. The European court ruled that this had been discriminatory – leading to changes to prevent the same thing happening again.

Themes: Right to family life Freedom of religion and belief

Austria

Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights