CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 19 septembre 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5FFF0A78 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .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 } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .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 } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s8E5A2C6E { width:3.88%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s3528E815 { width:8.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2C3CD8A1 { width:10.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sCA8669C2 { width:7.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sCAD28C0A { width:23.68%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s4242624C { width:8.82%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s18E818F5 { width:8.7%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sBD1D1046 { width:14.7%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sB5B1C99F { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sD35D798C { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sC3AD118 { width:12.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF3F0BE14 { width:3.88%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; 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 } .s9BA01D82 { width:8.84%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s401BBE03 { width:10.78%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s6FA5668A { width:7.84%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC83A848F { width:23.68%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sED74A3C4 { width:8.82%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s65DAD605 { width:8.7%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE3181E92 { width:14.7%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB080BB83 { width:12.76%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 58442/09 Giuseppa D’ALBA against Italy and 9 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 19   September 2024 as a Committee composed of:   Krzysztof Wojtyczek , President ,   Lətif Hüseynov,   Erik Wennerström , 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, 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. The applicant, Ms Giuseppa d’Alba, died after the institution of the proceedings before the Court. Her heirs (see the appended table below) wished to pursue the application. The Government did not object against the locus standi of the heirs in the proceedings. 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 the applicant, Ms Giuseppa d’Alba, and the wish of her heirs to continue the proceedings in her stead, as well as the absence of an objection on the Government’s part to their standing. Therefore, the Court considers that the heirs of Ms Giuseppa d’Alba, as indicated in the table below, have a legitimate interest in pursuing the application. The Court further notes that the Government informed it that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article   37 of the Convention. 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 (see for relevant details the attached table). They offered to pay the applicants 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 undertook 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 were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from them accepting the terms of the declarations. The Court observes that Article   37 §   1   (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if: “... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”. Thus, it may strike out applications under Article   37 §   1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v.   Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no.   26307/95, §§   75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI). The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of “Pinto” domestic decisions (see, for example, Gaglione and Others v.   Italy, nos.   45867/07 and others, 21 December 2010, and Gagliano Giorgi v.   Italy, no.   23563/07, 6 March 2012). Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1   (c)). In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1 in fine ). Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article   37 §   2 of the Convention (see Josipović v.   Serbia (dec.), no.   18369/07, 4   March 2008). 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 Mr Giuseppa d’Alba have   locus standi   in the proceedings ; Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 10 October 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 Other complaints under   well-established case-law   Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of applicant’s comments, if any Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros) [1] Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros) [2]     58442/09 26/10/2009 Giuseppa D’ALBA 1935 Died in 2012   Heirs: Giovanni BARONE 1959   Mario BARONE 1963   Rosalia BARONE Born in 1975   Di Salvo Federico Florence Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of civil proceedings - the excessive length of the main proceedings since the Pinto decision acknowledging the violation and awarding compensation has not been enforced to date (Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, § 87-90,   ECHR 2006-V)   Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of civil proceedings - The applicant complains about the excessive length of the Pinto proceedings since the Pinto decision acknowledging the violation and awarding compensation has not yet been enforced by the Government (Gagliano Giorgi v. Italy, no. 23563/07, § 73-76, ECHR 2012). 06/05/2024 08/06/2024 200 30     17852/23 26/04/2023 (3 applicants) Maria Teresa Lucia SERGIO 1944   Linda CANGELMI 1958   Vittoria DAMMICO 1951   Abbate Ferdinando Emilio Rome   06/05/2024   200 30     20537/23 17/05/2023 Eugenio SCORZA 1953   Falbo Cristina Cosence   06/05/2024   200 30     21108/23 17/05/2023 (11 applicants) Maria Domenica GUERRA 1958   Alessandra BONETTI 1965   Rosa Anna CAPOGROSSI 1954   Donatella GLORIA 1960   Franco GROSSI 1941   Maria Pia NEVOLA 1955   Marcella PRENCIPE 1956   Maria Rita RISCALDATI 1964   Antonio RUSSO 1946   Immacolata Maria SCURTI 1951   Patrizia SERGIO 1960   Abbate Ferdinando Emilio Rome   06/05/2024   200 30     26598/23 29/06/2023 Delia MASSA D’ELIA 1969   Pasquariello Gianpiero Caserte   06/05/2024   200 30     29864/23 01/06/2023 (52 applicants) Giovanni ABBRACCIAVENTO 1942   Carmelo ARENA 1954   Ignazio BARONE 1961   Diego BARRACO 1963   Giovanni BIGICA 1961   Vincenzo CALCAGNO 1954   Sigismundo CALDARERI 1957   Tommaso CALIÒ 1964   Antonino CALTAGIRONE 1959   Gaetano CAMPIONE 1959   Giuseppe CANNAVÒ 1964   Giovanni CAPOBIANCO 1961   Gaetano CAPPELLANO 1962   Umberto CARRATÙ 1965   Arturo COMPAGNONI 1957   Carmelo CUMBO 1954   Carmelo CUNSOLO 1965   Giuseppe D’ANNA 1961   Salvatore DI GIORGIO 1959   Mario Salvatore GIUFFRIDA 1963   Maurizio GUARNERI 1960   Leonardo GUIDOTTI 1962   Vincenzo LANZALACO 1955   Vincenzo LO MEDICO 1965   Giovanni MANISCALCO 1958   Domenico MARASCA 1956   Salvatore MARINO 1965   Pietro MAZZARA 1962   Antonio MESCOLO 1962   Salvatore MIGLIORE 1959   Stefano MIGLIORE 1956   Salvatore Innocenzo MIOSI 1956   Giovanni NIGRO 1963   Carmelo ODDO 1961   Pasquale PARRUCCHELLA 1964   Francesco Paolo PASSANTINO 1958   Alfredo PIACENTINO 1965   Dario PISCITELLO 1961   Angelo PITTI 1964   Antonio PULIZZOTTO 1959   Giuseppe PULVIRENTI 1959   Oronzo PUTIGNANO 1956   Benedetto RUBINO 1953   Augusto SAROLI 1967   Gaetano Maurizio SCIALABBA 1962   Antonio SPERANZA 1965   Raimondo SPEZIO 1957   Oronzo TARANTINO 1964   Aldo TEDESCHI 1962   Loreto VARA 1955   Massimo VECCE 1962   Giuseppe VOLPE 1961   Savoca Alessandro Palerme Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of civil proceedings - the excessive length of the main proceedings since the Pinto decision acknowledging the violation and awarding compensation has not been enforced to date (Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, § 87-90, ECHR 2006-V). 06/05/2024 03/06/2024 200 30     35097/23 01/08/2018 Alfonso IANNICELLI 1962   Frisani Pietro Florence   06/05/2024   200 30     35098/23 24/07/2019 Francesco MATTIELLO 1974   Frisani Pietro Florence   06/05/2024   200 30     35100/23 24/07/2019 Yashmina PERRA 1984   Frisani Pietro Florence   06/05/2024   200 30   35128/23 12/09/2023 Domenico DI GIACOMO 1955   Abbate Ferdinando Emilio Rome   06/05/2024   200 30   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant [2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant