Search
document

Document text Analytics

CASE OF LUCARELLI v. ITALY

Doc ref: 20038/92 • ECHR ID: 001-20

Document date: September 13, 1995

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

CASE OF LUCARELLI v. ITALY

Doc ref: 20038/92 • ECHR ID: 001-20

Document date: September 13, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

In the case of Lucarelli 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 10/1995/516/602. 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 9 February 1995 by an Italian national,

Mr Alessandro Lucarelli, 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. 20038/92), lodged with the Commission by

Mr Lucarelli on 29 February 1992;

Whereas the applicant complained of, among other matters, the

length of proceedings in the Italian civil courts, to which he was a

party, and the fact that he had had to be assisted by a lawyer during

these proceedings, 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 on 5 July 1994 the Commission declared admissible only

the complaint relating to the length of the proceedings in issue;

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, the length of the proceedings, in respect of which he sought just

satisfaction under Article 50 (art. 50) of the Convention, and the fact

that he had had to be assisted by a lawyer;

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, while

consideration of the other complaints lies outside the Court's

jurisdiction, as the Commission has declared them inadmissible;

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