CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 mars 2024

.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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s434D37A9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } Published on 15 April 2024   FIRST SECTION Application no. 17949/20 Domenico SICLARI against Italy lodged on 24 March 2020 communicated on 26 March 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the loss of more than half of the applicant’s remuneration as a result of legislation repealing a benefit ( assegno personale nei passaggi di carriera ) provided for in section 202 of the Presidential Decree no.   3 of 10 January 1957. In 2013 the applicant, a former employee of the Chamber of Deputies, resigned from his post upon having received assurances from his new employer, the University of Rome “La Sapienza”, that he would benefit from the assegno personale . Following the entry into force of section 1(458) and (459) of Law no.   147 of   27 December 2013, which repealed section 202 of the Presidential Decree no.   3 of 10 January 1957, the University of Rome “La Sapienza” continued to pay him the assegno personale considering that the repealing provisions affected only public servants who had moved to a new post after the date of entry into force of Law no. 147 of 27 December 2013 (1   January   2014). By the order no. 216 of 20 January 2017, the University of Rome “La   Sapienza” carried out a fresh determination of the applicant’s salary that did not include the assegno personale . The applicant challenged the order before administrative courts. By a final judgment no. 6620 of 2019, issued on 25   September   2019, the Council of State held that under section 1(458) and (459) of Law no.   147 of 27   December 2013 the payment of the benefit to public servants who had moved to a new post before 1 January 2014 had to be discontinued as of February 2014. Under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 the applicant complains that, notwithstanding the assurances and actual payment of the benefit received by national authorities from 2013 to 2016, he was deprived of more than half of his remuneration as a result of the retroactive and unforeseeable application of a legislative provision. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES AND INFORMATIONS SOUGHT Has there been an interference with the applicant’s peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No.   1?   In particular:   (a)     did the applicant have a possession within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see Koufaki and Adedy v. Greece (dec.), nos.   57665/12 and 57657/12, §§ 22 and 32-34, 7   May   2013)?   (b)     If so, did the applicant’s loss of the benefit provided for in section   202 of the Presidential Decree no. 3 of 10 January 1957, as a consequence of the application of section 1(458) and (459) of Law no. 147 of 27 December   2013, which he claims resulted in a loss of more than half his remuneration, constitute an interference with the applicant’s peaceful enjoyment of his possession in the public interest and in accordance with the conditions provided for by law, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 (see, for example, Da Conceição Mateus and Santos Januário v.   Portugal (dec.), nos.   62235/12 and 57725/12, § 22, 8   October 2013; Da Silva Carvalho Rico v. Portugal (dec.), no. 13341/14, § 37, 1   September   2015; Žegarac and   Others v. Serbia (dec.), no. 54805/15 and 10 other applications, §§   81-83, 17   January 2023)?   (c)     Did that interference impose an excessive individual burden on the applicant (see, mutatis mutandis , Koufaki and Adedy , cited above, §§   43-48; Stefanetti and Others v. Italy , nos. 21838/10 and 7 others, §§   57-66, 15   April 2014, and Žegarac , cited above, §§ 98-104)?   The parties are further requested to:   -     specify when the University of Rome “La Sapienza” discontinued the payment of the benefit provided for in section 202 of the Presidential Decree no.   3 of 10 January 1957 and the difference between the amounts received by the applicant before and after that discontinuation; -     inform the Court as to whether, as a result of the application of section   1(458) and (459) of Law no. 147 of 27 December 2013, the applicant was requested to give back part of the remunerations already received; -     provide a copy judgment of the Council of State no. 6620 of 2019 including the date of deposit with its registry.