Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

CASE OF ARLISTICO v. ITALY

Doc ref: 29720/96 • ECHR ID: 001-88

Document date: August 5, 1997

  • Inbound citations: 1
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

CASE OF ARLISTICO v. ITALY

Doc ref: 29720/96 • ECHR ID: 001-88

Document date: August 5, 1997

Cited paragraphs only



     In the case of Arlistico v. Italy (1),

     The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights,

constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of the

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2),

_______________

Notes by the Registrar

1.  The case is numbered 28/1997/812/1015.  The first number is the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the

relevant year (second number).  The last two numbers indicate the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its

creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications

to the Commission.

2.  Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994, apply

to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9 (P9).

________________

     Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 25 June 1997, and composed

of the following judges:

     Mr A. Spielmann, Chairman,

     Mr C. Russo,

     Mr J. De Meyer,

and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,

     Having regard to the application against the Italian Republic

lodged with the Court on 18 February 1997 by an Italian national,

Mr Michele Arlistico, within the three-month period laid down by

Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 of the Convention (art. 32-1,

art. 47);

     Whereas Italy has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the

Court (Article 46 of the Convention (art. 46)) and ratified

Protocol No. 9 to the Convention (P9), Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends

Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) so as to enable a person,

non-governmental organisation or group of individuals having lodged a

complaint with the European Commission of Human Rights

("the Commission") to refer the case to the Court;

     Noting that the present case has not been referred to the Court

by either the Government of the respondent State or the Commission

under Article 48 para. 1 (a) or (d) of the Convention (art. 48-1-a,

art. 48-1-d);

     Having regard to the Commission's report of 3 December 1996 on

the application (no. 29720/96) lodged with the Commission by

Mr Arlistico on 27 June 1994;

     Whereas the applicant complained of the length of proceedings in

an Italian civil court, to which he is a party, and alleged a breach

of Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1), under which "In the

determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is

entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal

...";

     Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his

application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of Court B,

stated that he sought a decision by the Court holding that there had

been a breach of Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1) and

ordering (1) the respondent State to pay him compensation for the

pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage he had allegedly sustained on

account of the length of the proceedings and (2) the defendant in the

domestic proceedings to pay him damages;

     Having regard to Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) and

Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,

1.   Finds that

(a) the case raises no serious question affecting the interpretation

     or application of the Convention, as the Court has already

     established case-law on the "reasonable time" requirement in

     Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1); and

(b) the case does not, for any other reason, warrant consideration

     by the Court as, in the event of a finding that there has been

     a breach of the Convention, the Committee of Ministers of the

     Council of Europe can award the applicant just satisfaction,

     having regard to any proposals made by the Commission;

2.   Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be

     considered by the Court.

     Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on

5 August 1997 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.

Signed: Alphonse SPIELMANN

        Chairman

Signed: Herbert PETZOLD

        Registrar

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846