CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 janvier 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s3AAA249C { width:91.26%; border-collapse:collapse } .s8E8F6944 { width:13.86%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sBEDA98F9 { width:24.62%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD080128 { width:12.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s817AE20C { width:20.34%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF9AF48A4 { width:28.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s24B851EC { width:13.86%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s74DC3D21 { margin-left:33.01pt; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold } .s1A1A0F0F { width:24.62%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s270287DB { width:12.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sADA854A5 { width:20.34%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s195E3AC4 { width:28.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 31 January 2019   FIRST SECTION Application no. 22315/07 Giuseppe ZARRO and Others against Italy lodged on 4 May 2007 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants are the heirs of a tenant farmer who had initiated proceedings before the Benevento District Court in 1987, seeking compensation following the unlawful expropriation ( occupazione acquisitiva ) of the land on which he had been conducting his farming activities. Following the tenant farmer’s death, the applicants pursued the domestic proceedings in his stead. By a judgment delivered in 2006 the Naples Court of Appeal ruled that the applicants were entitled to compensation calculated in accordance with the “average agricultural value” ( valore agricolo medio ) criterion under Law No. 865 of 1971. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol   No.   1?   In particular, did that interference impose an excessive individual burden on the applicants on account of the compensation awarded to them being calculated in accordance with the “average agricultural value” criterion (see, mutatis mutandis , Preite v. Italy , no. 28976/05, 17   November 2015)?   2.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?     No. Firstname LASTNAME Birth year Place of residence Representative   Giuseppe ZARRO 1949 Benevento S. Ferrara   Consiglia ZARRO 1935 Benevento S. Ferrara   Marisa Giuseppina ZARRO 1953 Benevento S. Ferrara   Sergio ZARRO 1951 Benevento S. Ferrara