Search
document

Document text Analytics

CASE OF COLACIOPPO (No. 2) v. ITALY

Doc ref: 20210/92 • ECHR ID: 001-8

Document date: September 13, 1995

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

CASE OF COLACIOPPO (No. 2) v. ITALY

Doc ref: 20210/92 • ECHR ID: 001-8

Document date: September 13, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

In the case of Colacioppo v. Italy (no. 2) (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 3/1995/509/592. 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 28 April, 29 June and

1 September 1995, and composed of the following judges:

Mr Thór Vilhjálmsson, Chairman,

Mr F. Gölcüklü,

Mr C. Russo,

and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,

Having regard to the application against the Italian Republic

lodged with the Court on 16 January 1995 by an Italian national,

Mr Antonio Colacioppo, within the three-month period laid down by

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

Convention;

Whereas Italy has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the

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

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

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

Convention;

Having regard to the Commission's report of 18 October 1994 on

the application (no. 20210/92) lodged with the Commission by Mr

Colacioppo on 30 March 1992;

Whereas the applicant complained of the length of proceedings in

the Italian criminal courts, to which he was a party, and alleged a

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

"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any

criminal charge against him, 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 on account of, inter

alia, a disagreement between himself and the Commission about the

length of the period to be taken into consideration under Article 6

para. 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention and to obtain an order requiring

the respondent State to make good the considerable pecuniary and non-

pecuniary damage he had allegedly sustained on account of the length

of the proceedings in issue;

Having regard to Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention 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 (art. 6-1) of the

Convention, and as the case turns mainly on its facts; 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

13 September 1995 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.

Signed: THÓR VILHJÁLMSSON

Chairman

Signed: Herbert PETZOLD

Registrar

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant