CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 mars 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA0423EB2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-35.45pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:13pt } .s8DC85F97 { width:111.36%; border-collapse:collapse } .s767FFBCA { width:6.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sCC002BDF { width:40.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s303784BA { width:17.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s9F6E0661 { width:17.66%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s243FF96F { width:17.62%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sEB980A2 { width:6.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sAEC2BED7 { margin-top:2pt; margin-bottom:2pt; font-size:12pt } .sF921FE53 { width:40.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF1307286 { width:17.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s8F4CE18B { margin-top:2pt; margin-bottom:2pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .s792BD0C7 { width:17.66%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s55307A23 { width:17.62%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 12 April 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 65516/10 Emilio FELIZIANI and Others against Italy lodged on 27 October 2010 communicated on 23 March 2021 (see appendix) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the deprivation of the applicants’ land through the application of the constructive-expropriation rule (“ accessione invertita ” or “ occupazione acquisitiva ”) by the domestic courts. Invoking Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 14 of the Convention, the applicants claim that they were awarded an amount of compensation for their property that is far lower than that to which they would have been entitled if the authorities had followed the expropriation procedure laid down by the law. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1?   2.     In particular, 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 (merits), no. 58858/00, 8 December 2005; Belvedere Alberghiera s.r.l v.   Italy (merits), no. 31524/96, 30 May 2000)? The parties are invited to answer this question taking into account the following aspects: (i)     the alleged delays and uncertainties of the expropriation proceedings relating to the applicants’ property, including the supposed state of uncertainty regarding the revocation, re-approval, extension, and duration of the land-use restrictions imposed on the property; (ii)   the duration of time that elapsed from the moment at which the authorities took physical possession of the applicants’ land and the moment when the applicants lost their right of ownership (see Odescalchi and Lante della Rovere v. Italy , no. 38754/07, 7 July 2015).   3.     Did the amount of compensation awarded to the applicants reflect the market value of the property at the relevant time, adjusted for inflation and increased by the amount of interest due (see Guiso-Gallisay v. Italy (just satisfaction) [GC], no.   58858/00, §   105, 22 December 2009; Preite v.   Italy , no.   28976/05, 17   November 2015)? The parties are invited to answer this question taking into account, insofar as relevant to the resolution of the issues arising in the present case, the case-law of domestic courts concerning the distinction between ‘building restraints’ ( vincoli conformativi ) and ‘expropriation-aimed restraints’ ( vincoli preordinati all’esproprio ). APPENDIX   No. Applicant’s Name Birth year Nationality Place of residence 1 Emilio FELIZIANI 1937 Italian Spoleto (Pg) 2 Luigi FELIZIANI 1941 Italian Spoleto (Pg) 3 Francesca LEONCILLI MASSI 1966 Italian Spoleto (Pg)