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

CASE OF GRANATIERO v. ITALY

Doc ref: 21671/93 • ECHR ID: 001-17

Document date: September 13, 1995

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

CASE OF GRANATIERO v. ITALY

Doc ref: 21671/93 • ECHR ID: 001-17

Document date: September 13, 1995

Cited paragraphs only



        In the case of Granatiero 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 30/1995/536/622.  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 7 March 1995 by two Italian nationals,

Mrs Raffaella Granatiero and Mrs Rosa Granatiero, 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. 21671/93) lodged with the Commission by

Mrs Raffaella Granatiero and Mrs Rosa Granatiero on 4 January 1993;

        Whereas the applicants complained of the length of proceedings

in an Italian civil court, to which they are parties, 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 ..., everyone

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

tribunal ...";

        Whereas the applicants, in specifying the object of their

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

stated that they sought a decision by the Court (i) holding that there

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

(ii) bringing to a speedy conclusion the proceedings in question,

(iii) recognising the existence of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage

and (iv) compelling the respondent State to take emergency action to

remedy the constant and perpetual violation of Article 6 para. 1

(art. 6-1) said to exist in Italy, for which the State was allegedly

responsible;

        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 has no jurisdiction to make orders such as those sought

        by the applicants; 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 applicants

        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

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 393980 • Paragraphs parsed: 42814632 • Citations processed 3216094