Lexploria

FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 26056/07 Rosario ADAMI and O thers against Italy

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 16 May 2019 as a Committee composed of:

Aleš Pejchal, President, Jovan Ilievski, Gilberto Felici, judges,

and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 June 2007,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicant s is set out in the appended tables.

The applicants were represented by Mr Giuseppe Ferraro, a lawyer practising in Naples.

The applicants ’ complaint under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the legislative interference pending judicial proceedings in respect of all the applicants listed in the appendices were communicated to the Italian Government (“the Government”) .

THE LAW

The Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by this complaint with respect to the applicants listed in Appendix I. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.

The Government acknowledged the legislative interference pending judicial proceedings in respect of the applicants listed in Appendix I. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in Appendix I and invited the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court ’ s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case with respect to the applicants listed in the Appendix I.

The applicants listed in Appendix I were sent the terms of the Government ’ s unilateral declaration on 25 October 2017. The Court has received a response from the applicants ’ representative not accepting the terms of the declaration.

The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:

“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicant s wish the examination of the case to be continued (see, in particular, Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).

The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the legislative interference pending judicial proceedings in Italy (see, for example, Arras and Others v. Italy , no. 17972/07, 14 February 2012; Natale and Others v. Italy , no. 19264/07, 15 October 2013; and Casacchia and Others v. Italy , nos. 23658/07 and 2 others, 15 October 2013).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government ’ s declaration as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 (c)).

In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application with respect to the applicants listed in Appendix I (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Furthermore, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention ( Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

As regards the applicants listed in Appendix II, the Court notes that they died and no heirs have come forward.

Accordingly, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application with respect to these applicants (Article 37 § 1 (c)).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list as regards the applicants concerned by the unilateral declaration as well as the deceased applicants (see Appendices I and II).

As regards the applicants listed in Appendix III, the Court notes that they did not provide the information requested when the case was communicated in order to demonstrate their victim status for the purposes of this complaint under the Convention.

Having regard to its findings, the Court considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, this complaint does not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention.

It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government ’ s declaration concerning the applicants listed in Appendix I , and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention with respect to the applicants listed in Appendices I and II;

Declares the application inadmissible as regards the applicants listed in Appendix III.

Done in English and notified in writing on 6 June 2019 .

Liv Tigerstedt Aleš Pejchal Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant ’ s name

Date of birth

Date of receipt of Government ’ s declaration

Date of receipt of applicant ’ s comments, if any

Amount awarded for pecuniary damage per applicant/household

(in euros) [1]

Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application

(in euros) [2]

26056/07

15/06/2007

Anna AIELLO

07/09/1924

Anna Maria BADOLATO

27/11/1924

Francesco BERETTA

09/09/1925

Alfio BIONDI

12/02/1942

Brunetto BRUNELLI

20/10/1920

Salvatore CALDERONI

23/12/1935

Cataldo CAPANO

12/03/1939

Carmen CARVELLI

06/12/1919

Maria Michele CIANI

04/04/1946

Angelo CONSOLE

09/10/1940

Giuseppina

DE GENNARO

03/07/1992

Cosimo DE LUCA

05/02/1933

Marisa DE NAPOLI

19/06/1947

Maria DE NICOLA

13/09/1925

Vito Filippo DE SANTIS

25/11/1937

Dario DI MATTIA

25/05/1928

Maria Iolanda DIONISIO

06/02/1923

Francesco FALCO

27/02/1922

Ercole FARRUGIA

23/06/1941

Pierluigi FERRATI

21/06/1931

Vincenzo GAETANIELLO

23/01/1933

Mario Egisto GERINI

03/02/1933

Edda GHERSEVICH

19/02/1934

Bruna GIORDANO

21/10/1948

Tito Italo GRECO

30/03/1941

Lidia IANNELLI

20/07/1924

Lydia IUZZOLINO

26/08/1941

Filomena LIBERTINI

15/03/1937

Lucia LIBERTINI

26/12/1941

Grazia MARESCA

04/06/1924

Maria MAURO

13/07/1946

Luigi MAZZITELLI

24/09/1934

Maria MICHELUTTI

05/02/1918

Iolanda MODOLO

14/11/1925

Elda MONTANARI

10/06/1923

Giuseppe PANTANO

12/11/1921

Elena PARRELLA

13/12/1935

Marco Mario PASANISI

25/04/1940

Luigi PERELLI

19/05/1930

Maria PETRACCONE

27/08/1941

Mario PIAZZOLLA

18/01/1938

Marianna PODDA

21/07/1942

Iole Maria POL

13/10/1926

Atos PORCU

11/03/1937

Giovanni PRIVITERA

20/12/1929

Emilia RADDINO

14/09/1915

Rosanna

RAGOZZINO

26/04/1951

Carmine ROSSI

07/01/1922

Liliana SALVI

15/07/1926

Ugo SANTORO

21/11/1934

Stefano SODANO

14/05/1938

Grazia Maria SOLINAS

18/12/1931

Aldo TANGO

01/12/1924

Giorgio TERSIGNI

17/11/1931

Mario TROTTA

14/11/1932

Giuseppina VALENTE

25/02/1920

Luigi VECCHIONE

17/03/1937

Gidemore VIAGGIO

01/11/1934

25/10/2017

05/03/2018

4,500

4,600

8,700

6,900

6,300

6,000

6,100

4,700

6,500

6,100

6,600

5,000

4,600

7,000

6,800

5,300

9,700

4,800

4,700

6,100

4,400

6,400

4,900

5,800

4,300

5,400

4,200

8,600

4,200

5,600

15,200

5,200

4,100

9,000

5,000

6,600

6,200

5,400

6,100

7,900

5,600

6,300

8,800

5,700

4,200

7,200

4,600

5,400

7,700

6,400

11,200

5,000

6,800

6,000

4,500

6,200

200APPENDIX II

Name Date of birth - date of demise

APPENDIX III

Name Date of birth

[1] . Plus any tax that may be chargeable.

2 . Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

[2] *

Menu

ADAMI AND OTHERS v. ITALY

ADAMI AND OTHERS v. ITALY

LEXI