A. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT OF 23 SEPTEMBER 1998 (c) for the applicant Mr A. LEVY QC, Barrister-at-Law, Mr T. EICKE, Barrister-at-Law, Mr M. GARDNER, Mr P. NEWELL, 3 Counsel, Solicitor, Adviser. The Court heard addresses by Mr Bratza, Mr Levy and Mr Pannick. AS TO THE FACTS I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 7. The applicant is a British citizen, born in 1984. In May 1990 he and his brother were placed on the local child protection register because of “known physical abuse”. The cohabitant of the boys’ mother was given a police caution after he admitted hitting A. with a cane. Both boys were removed from the child protection register in November 1991. The cohabitant subsequently married the applicant’s mother and became his stepfather. 8. In February 1993, the head teacher at A.’s school reported to the local Social Services Department that A.’s brother had disclosed that A. was being hit with a stick by his stepfather. The stepfather was arrested on 5 February 1993 and released on bail the next day. 9. On 5 February 1993 the applicant was examined by a consultant paediatrician, who found the following marks on his body, inter alia: (1) a fresh red linear bruise on the back of the right thigh, consistent with a blow from a garden cane, probably within the preceding twenty-four hours; (2) a double linear bruise on the back of the left calf, consistent with two separate blows given some time before the first injury; (3) two lines on the back of the left thigh, probably caused by two blows inflicted one or two days previously; (4) three linear bruises on the right bottom, consistent with three blows, possibly given at different times and up to one week old; (5) a fading linear bruise, probably several days old. The paediatrician considered that the bruising was consistent with the use of a garden cane applied with considerable force on more than one occasion.