CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 mai 2019
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-193394
- Date
- 3 mai 2019
- Publication
- 3 mai 2019
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleCommunicated
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s2FDFA002 { width:93.14%; border-collapse:collapse } .s34E49363 { width:9.56%; 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 } .s7F93C9ED { width:24.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sA1A9243B { width:16.68%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sCD693B7F { width:19.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sAFA6ACC7 { width:29.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF18EF3B1 { width:9.56%; 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 } .sFECD8A64 { width:24.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4C6C1307 { width:16.68%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7BF5F9DA { width:19.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s135B901E { width:29.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 3 May 2019   FIRST SECTION Application no. 50827/11 Maria Teresa GIUFFRÉ and Others against Italy lodged on 11 August 2011 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the deprivation of the applicants’ land through the application of an indirect form of expropriation (“ occupazione usurpativa ”) by the domestic courts. The applicants lodged two sets of proceedings arguing that they had been unlawfully dispossessed of their property and seeking compensation. As it emerges from the domestic decisions, the deprivation of the applicants’ property, whose unlawful nature was acknowledged by the courts, was found to have occurred in 1991. The two sets of proceedings lodged by the applicants are still ongoing before the domestic courts.   QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants been deprived of their possessions in accordance with the conditions provided for by law, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, amongst many other authorities, Guiso-Gallisay v.   Italy , no. 58858/00, 8 December 2005; Rivera and di Bonaventura v.   Italy , no. 63869/00, 14 June 2011; De Caterina and Others v.   Italy , no.   65278/01, 28 June 2011; and Messana v. Italy , no.   26128/04, 9   February   2017)?   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   Maria Teresa GIUFFRЀ 1969 Rome L. Tassone   Guido GIUFFRЀ 1934 Rome L. Tassone   Margherita GIUFFRЀ 1971 Rome L. Tassone   Maria Novella GIUFFRЀ 1980 Rome L. Tassone   Maria Rosa GIUFFRЀ 1937 Rome L. Tassone   Maria Teresa GIUFFRЀ 1931 Rome L. Tassone   Paola GIUFFRЀ 1970 Rome L. Tassone    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 3 mai 2019
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-193394
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel