CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 18 mars 2004

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sB8987CE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s84D0D60A { width:8.36pt; display:inline-block } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sBB5E682E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sF604F523 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt } .sE307A2C0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:13.5pt } .s4B4B41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt } .s145CCEB3 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s377C1984 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA918FEC8 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.4pt } .sBED5F98F { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt } .sA5C4F8A9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s7A14DEE0 { width:19.63pt; display:inline-block } .s4F826530 { width:185.01pt; display:inline-block } .sA1981C75 { width:4.63pt; display:inline-block } .s48DA3DF7 { width:206.03pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 53067/99 by Antonio ESPOSITO against Italy The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 18   March   2004 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   C.L. Rozakis , President ,   Mr   E. Levits ,   Mrs   S. Botoucharova ,   Mr   A. Kovler ,   Mr   V. Zagrebelsky ,   Mrs   E. Steiner ,   Mr   K. Hajiyev, judges , and Mr S. Q uesada , Deputy Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 September 1999, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Antonio Esposito, is an Italian national who was born in 1948 and lives in Pozzuoli. He was represented before the Court by Mr   C. Pollio, a lawyer practising in Naples. The respondent Government were represented by their successive Agents, respectively Mr U. Leanza and Mr I.M. Braguglia, and by their successive co-Agents, respectively Mr V. Esposito and Mr F. Crisafulli The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. By an act of 30 April 1990 the Naples carabinieri informed the applicant of the proceedings pending against him for, among others, unpremeditated homicide. He was subsequently examined on 3 May 1990. By an order of 29 January 1991, served on the applicant on 9 May 1991, the Naples Public Prosecutor's Office committed the applicant and six other persons for trial commencing on 22 October 1991 before the Sessa Aurunca (Naples) Magistrate. Different hearings took place until 29 October 1998. By a judgment of 26 January 1999, filed with the registry on 9   March   1999, the Sessa Aurunca Magistrate convicted the applicant to one year and two months' imprisonment for murder and declared the remainder of the charges time-barred. On 13 April 1999 the applicant filed an appeal. By a judgement of 26 May 2000, filed with the registry on 5   June 2000, the Court of Appeal acquitted the applicant on the ground that the charges brought against him were time-barred.   COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings. THE LAW In a letter of 15 May 2001 the Registry of the Court informed the applicant that Law no. 89 of 24   March 2001 (“the Pinto Act”) had come into force on 18 April 2001, introducing into Italian legislation a remedy in respect of the excessive length of court proceedings. In a letter received by the Registry of the Court on 5 April 2002, the applicant informed the Court of the fact that he intended to make use of the Pinto Act and asked that the Court suspends the examination of his case. On 21 October 2003, the Registry of the Court invited the applicant to submit by 21 November 2003 an update of the facts concerning the procedure instituted under the Pinto Act. The Registry of the Court also asked the applicant to confirm whether he had still interest in the examination of his case. Having received no reply, by a registered letter of 16   December 2003, the Registry of the Court renewed its request and warned the applicant that, should such information not be received by 26 January 2004, the Court might decide to strike the case off its case-list. The applicant, who received the said letter on 22 December 2003, did not reply. In the light of the above, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 of the Convention, the Court now considers that the applicant has lost interest in his application. Furthermore, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention which require the continuation of the examination of the application. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Santiago Q uesada   Christos Rozakis   Deputy Registrar   President