CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 14 décembre 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s4EC3C151 { width:116.76pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sFF075836 { margin-right:7.05pt; margin-left:7.05pt; border-collapse:collapse; } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s779875C9 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:-0.2pt; color:#424242 } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sF314C99F { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sAB95A5CB { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#424242 } .sBB8C798C { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sB853CD26 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sB343B0AA { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 26083/13 Nicola BABUSCIO and Others against Italy and 4 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 14   December 2023 as a Committee composed of:   Krzysztof Wojtyczek , President ,   Lətif Hüseynov,   Ivana Jelić , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to these declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of “Pinto” domestic decisions were communicated to the Italian Government (“the Government”). In some of the applications, complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention. Some of the applicants died after the institution of the proceedings before the Court and their heirs (see the appended table below) wished to pursue the applications in their stead. The Government did not object against the locus   standi of the heirs in the proceedings. The Government submitted a declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications. The Government acknowledged the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of “Pinto” domestic decisions. In some of the applications, they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicants’ rights guaranteed by other provisions of the Convention. They offered to pay the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The Government also undertake to ensure the enforcement of the domestic decisions under consideration in the cases concerned (see appended table) within the same three-month period, and to pay any costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings. The payment and the enforcement of the domestic decisions in the cases concerned will constitute the final resolution of the cases. The applicants or their heirs informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the declarations. THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. The Court firstly takes note of the information regarding the death of some of the applicants indicted in the appended table and the wish of their heirs to continue the proceedings in the stead of their late relatives, as well as of the absence of an objection on the Government’s part to their standing. Therefore, the Court considers that the heirs of the late applicants, as indicated in the table below, have a legitimate interest in pursuing the applications. The Court finds that, following the applicant party’s express agreement to the terms of the declarations made by the Government, the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties. It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of the applications. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.   For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides that the heirs of the late applicants, as indicated in the appended table, have locus standi in the proceedings; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 18 January 2024.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Krzysztof Wojtyczek   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of “Pinto” domestic decisions) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Relevant domestic decision Other complaints under well-established case-law   Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of applicant’s acceptance Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage per applicant/household (in euros) [1] Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros) [2]     26083/13 09/04/2013 (34 applicants) Nicola BABUSCIO 1956 Giorgio NIRO 1937 Antonio Salvatore FUCCI 1948 Santa BORRIELLO 1970 Francesco Pantaleo PALLONE 1944 Giovanni DEL VECCHIO 1957 Carmela PERRETTA * 1932 Dario DI MAURO 1961 Rocco RIVIELLO 1953 Roberto PACILIO 1946 Deceased in 2020     Heirs (household): Lucia COCO 1952 Marco PACILIO 1983 Paola PACILIO 1980   Anna Pia ROSI 1946 Antonio GIUDITTA 1952 Ugo SCUOTTO 1938 Deceased in 2020 Heir: Ignazia STILLITTANO 1945   Salvatore CALVELLI 1945 Paolo FEDELINI 1952 Ludovico POLIZIO 1947 Alfredo Andrea FUCCI 1954 Franco DE CICCO 1955 Bruno DI FRANCIA 1941 Maria Renata PROVERBIO 1954   Household Anna SCUOTTO * 1937 Antonio SCUOTTO* 1948 Ciro SCUOTTO * 1952 Assunta SCUOTTO * 1947   Household Filomena NAPOLITANO * 1981 Antonio Gennaro NAPOLITANO * 1946 Laura NAPOLITANO * 1982 Mario NAPOLITANO * 1984   Household Sara FRANZESE * 1989 Angela ANGIERO * 1956 Aniello FRANZESE * 1988   Household Nicola NAPOLITANO * 1979 Felicia FUCCI * 1946   Ferraro Massimo Palma Campania As regards the applicants without an asterisk:   Naples Court of Appeal R.G. 1523/18, 02/11/2018 Ministry of Justice     As regards the applicants with an asterisk:   Naples Court of Appeal R.G. 2633/18, 09/05/2019 Ministry of Justice Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of civil proceedings - The applicants claim to still be victims of a violation of Art. 6 for the excessive length of the main proceedings since the Pinto decision acknowledging the violation and awarding compensation has not been enforced ( Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, § 87-90, ECHR 2006-V),   Prot. 1 Art. 1 - interference with peaceful enjoyment of possessions   02/10/2023 02/11/2023 200 30     17434/14 20/12/2013 (110 applicants) Vittorio D’ANTONIO 1935 Carmela DI MAURO 1952 Ermelinda MANZO 1924 Virginia VANACORE 1954 Giuseppe ANZALONE * 1958 Gaetano GILBLAS 1932 Deceased in 2019 Heirs (household): Vincenzo GILBLAS 1965 Giovanni GILBLAS 1973 Filomena GILBLAS 1964   Gustavo SCHIANO* 1938 Claudio VITTORIA 1965 Lucio BUONADONNA * 1958 Biagio CELENTANO * 1949   Emanuele VITTORIO* 1938 Mario SELO* 1933 Carmela RAIOLA 1936 Angiolino CIFALDI 1947 Rossana CASTELLANO * 1965 Salvatore CONTIELLO 1955 Donato DE NOVELLIS * 1961 Angelo RUSSO* 1954 Alfonso VITALE* 1957 Eleonora RAIOLA 1931 Gerardo ROSSO 1937 Francesco MELE 1956 Emilio RUSSO* 1956 Angelo ROTOLI* 1960 Rachele SILVESTRI* 1941 Gerardo D’ANDRETTA 1955   Fausta CUOMO * 1941 Anna Maria VIGLIONE 1946 Gerardo PREZIOSO* 1941 Vincenzo AMATO * 1955 Enrico CATEMARIO * 1952 Guglielmo IANNELLI* 1953 Delia TENORE* 1961 Pietro GIUFFRIDA* 1960 Gabriella DI MARTINO * 1944 Francesco BUONADONNA 1959 Mario FATTORUSO 1946 Paolo DE CICCO * 1940 Fernando TIZZANO* 1951 Amalia MANGIAPIA* 1945 Angelina VISCARDI 1954 Anna Maria INFRANZI* 1926 Deceased in 2019 Heirs (household): Paola INFRANZI 1961 Emilia INFRANZI 1956 Enrico INFRANZI 1958   Salvatore PICONE* 1963 Alfredo NASTO 1953 Catello GARGIULO * 1947 Guido IZZO* 1959 Fortuna IMPROTA* 1960 Costabile ESPOSITO * 1953 Marco MUZZIO* 1954 Raffaele BISESTI * 1952 Salvatore Dante ANZALONE 1955 Paola MUTONE* 1949 Adelaide FERRARA * 1949 Alberto NASTO* 1951 Anna BAIANO * 1940 Gaetana AMARANTE * 1968 Carolina MARRANO 1951 Angelina ZARRA 1961 A driana CALAMITA * 1946 Immacolata ESPOSITO 1936 Paola VIGLIONE 1955 Giustino PATURZO 1942 Maurizio SINIBALDI* 1940 Salvatore FERRAIOLI * 1962 Carmine PRINZA* 1951 Palma ALFANO * 1942 Emanuela DE STEFANO * 1962 Angelina ARIANTE * 1950 Ciro CORCIONE * 1969 Antonietta PROVERBIO* 1943 Renato ORTONE* 1929 Sergio IPPOLITO* 1952 Giulio CRISCI * 1951 Antonio D’AMICO * 1945 Ruggiero NIGRO* 1934 Rocco ARCELLA * 1948 Giorgio MELE* 1945   Household Caterina ARIENZO* 1959 Rita ARIENZO* 1965 Antonio ARIENZO* 1966 Rosa ARIENZO* 1958   Ferraro Massimo Palma Campania For the applicants without an asterisk:   Naples Court of Appeal R.G. 1410/2018, 17/10/2018 Ministry of Justice   For the applicants with an asterisk:   Naples Court of Appeal R.G. 2344/2018, 16/12/2019 Ministry of Justice Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of civil proceedings - The applicants claim to still be victims of a violation of Art. 6 for the excessive length of the main proceedings since the Pinto decision acknowledging the violation and awarding compensation has not been enforced ( Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, § 87-90,   ECHR 2006-V),     Prot. 1 Art. 1 - interference with peaceful enjoyment of possessions   02/10/2023 02/11/2023 200 30     18962/15 11/12/2014 (36 applicants) Gennaro DE MARCO 1940 Domenico LOFFREDO 1952 Aniello FALCONE* 1951 Tommaso PETRILLO 1946 Maurizio NESTOVITO* 1958 Luisa PICCINELLI 1966 Fiore FUCCI 1939 Antonetta FERRARA* 1937 Angelo SANTILLO 1949 Donatella Maria Stella ORSI* 1957 Luciana CRUCIANI 1952 Marina ZEULI 1935 Maria CRUCIANI 1940 Armando NOTARO 1948 Salvatore CORCIONE 1941 Michele SABATINO 1922 Francesco LOMBARDI* 1950 Giannandrea LOMBARDO DI CUMIA 1934 Anna LUCIANI 1927   Francesco BUONPANE 1937 Elsa GENTILE* 1943 Pasquale FRANCO 1928 Deceased in 2020 Heirs (household): Anna GRASSO 1934 Vincenzo FRANCO 1965 Paola FRANCO 1961 Maria FRANCO 1960   Luciana BIONDI 1941 Decesead in 2020 Heirs (household): Rossella FALCONI 1977 Jessica FALCONI 1973   Antonio RUOCCO 1953   Household Pia GRELLA 1957 Maria Francesca GRELLA 1962 Luigi GRELLA 1964   Household Lorenza PARISI 1971 Roberta PARISI 1975 Ilde PARISI 1970 Annalisa PARISI 1971 Tiziana PARISI 1973   Household Monica GUADAGNI 1970 Pasquale GUADAGNI 1975 Paolo GUADAGNI 1972   Ferraro Massimo Palma Campania For the applicants without an asterisk:   Naples Court of Appeal R.G. 1302/18 20/09/2018 Ministry of Justice   For the applicants with an asterisk: Naples Court of Appeal R.G. 2068/18, 31/01/2019 Ministry of Justice Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of civil proceedings - The applicants claim to still be victims of a violation of Art. 6 for the excessive length of the main proceedings since the Pinto decision acknowledging the violation and awarding compensation has not been enforced ( Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, § 87-90, ECHR 2006-V),   Prot. 1 Art. 1 - interference with peaceful enjoyment of possessions 02/10/2023 02/11/2023 200 30     10416/23 28/02/2023 Luigi ROTONDO 1947 Jossa Daniela Naples Rome Court of Appeal R.G. 51301/2018, 21/06/2018 Ministry of Justice           02/10/2023 17/10/2023 200 30     10419/23 28/02/2023 Gaetana BOSSOLI 1961 Jossa Daniela Naples Naples Court of Appeal R.G. 1365/2020, 06/08/2020 Ministry of Justice   02/10/2023 24/10/2023 200 30   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants. [2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.