CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 28 juin 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 } .s65E06E64 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s943D4F93 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-indent:21.8pt; text-align:justify } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s93B87EE3 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:10pt } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 15 July 2024   FIRST SECTION Application no. 34322/15 Ruggero RAGAZZONI and Others against Italy and 2 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 28 June 2024     SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applications concern the combined effect of the confiscation of the price or proceeds of crimes, imposed in the course of criminal proceedings, and the order, issued by the Court of Audit, to pay damages resulting from the same conducts. The applicants were prosecuted and convicted for several crimes. In the context of criminal proceedings, the domestic courts ordered the confiscation of the price or proceeds of the crimes, pursuant to Articles 240, 322- ter and 640 quater of the Criminal Code. The applicants were subsequently brought before the Court of Audit in order to determine their liability towards the public administration for the same conducts that had been sanctioned by the criminal courts. In that context, the applicants argued that the confiscated amounts should have been deducted from the damages suffered by the public administration, in order to avoid a duplication of compensation. The Court of Audit, relying on the different nature and purpose of the two measures, rejected the applicants’ argument and ordered them to pay damages in full.     More detailed information on the national decisions and on the measures imposed to the applicants are indicated in the appended table. Invoking Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicants complain that the combined effect of the confiscation and of the damage award resulted in an excessive burden and was disproportionate to the aim of compensating the public administration for the damage suffered.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, was the interference with the applicants’ assets necessary and proportionate to the aim pursued? Taking into account the prior confiscation of assets, did the damage awards issued by the Court of Audit impose an excessive burden on the applicants?   APPENDIX List of applications No. Application no. Case name Introduction date Applicant’s name Year of birth Place of residence Nationality Representative’s name Location Criminal proceedings Proceedings before the Court of Audit 1. 34322/15 Ragazzoni and Others v. Italy 13/07/2015 Ruggero RAGAZZONI 1949 Turin Italian Davide RAGAZZONI 1969 Rivoli Italian Laura TINGHI 1941 Turin Italian Manuela ZAMPINI 1969 Rivoli Italian   Gianni Maria SARACCO Turin Milan District Court, 18/01/2010 : the applicants were convicted of participating in a criminal organisation (Article 416 of the Criminal Code, "CC"), corruption (Articles 319 and 321 CC) and fraud against the State (Article 640 § 2 CC); they were subject to the confiscation by equivalent means ( confisca per equivalente ) of the proceeds of crimes pursuant to Article 322 ter and 640 quater CC, in the following amounts: - Ruggero Ragazzoni: 157,125 euros (EUR) (EUR 257,125 minus the amount already reimbursed to the Presidency of the Council of Ministers); -Davide Ragazzoni: EUR 147,125; -Laura Tinghi: EUR 257,125; - Manuela Zampini: EUR 147,125. Milan Court of Appeal, 17/01/2011 : previous decision confirmed; Court of Cassation, 25/10/2011 : previous decision confirmed. Court of Audit (Piedmont Section), 1/10/2012 : the applicants were found liable towards the Ministry of Justice and ordered to pay damages, jointly with two others who are not parties to the present proceedings, in the following amounts: - Ruggero Ragazzoni: EUR 469,240; - Davide Ragazzoni: EUR 274,240; - Laura Tinghi: EUR 471,000; - Manuela Zampini: EUR 274,240.   Appellate Court of Audit, 27/01/2015 : previous decision confirmed.   2. 34324/15 Florio v. Italy 13/07/2015 Mario Emanuele FLORIO 1941 Turin Italian Monica FLORIO 1971 Turin Italian Salvatore FLORIO 1973 Turin Italian Gianni Maria SARACCO Turin Milan District Court, 18/01/2010 : the applicants were convicted of participating in a criminal organisation (Article 416 CC), corruption (Articles   319 and 321 CC) and fraud against the State (Article 640 § 2 CC); they were subject to the confiscation by equivalent means of the proceeds of crimes pursuant to Article 322 ter and 640 quater CC, in the following amounts: - Mario Emanuele Florio: EUR 670,701; - Monica Florio: EUR 191,641; - Salvatore Florio: EUR 191,641. Milan Court of Appeal, 17/01/2011 : the crimes of corruption and fraud were declared statute barred and the conviction under Article 416 CC was confirmed; the confiscation was converted into direct confiscation of the proceeds of crimes, pursuant to Article 240 CC. Court of Cassation, 25/10/2011 : previous decision confirmed. Court of Audit (Piedmont Section), 1/10/2012 : the applicants were found liable towards the Ministry of Justice and ordered to pay damages, jointly with two others who are not parties to the present proceedings, in the following amounts: - Mario Emanuele Florio: EUR   1,204,457.06; - Monica Florio: EUR 333,439.16; - Salvatore Florio: EUR 333,439.16. Appellate Court of Audit, 27/01/2015 : previous decision confirmed. 3. 65192/16 Bassignana v. Italy 04/11/2016 Luigi BASSIGNANA 1959 AOSTE Italian Bruno NASCIMBENE Milan Aosta preliminary investigations judge, 4/04/2006 : approval of the plea bargain for the crime of corruption (319, 319 bis and 321 CC); the applicant was subject to the confiscation of the price of crimes pursuant to Article 322 ter CC, in the amount of EUR 400,000. Court of Cassation, 20/02/2007 : previous decision confirmed. Criminal proceedings in Switzerland, concluded by judgment of the Federal Criminal Court of 14/06/2012 : the applicant was convicted for money laundering and subject to the confiscation of EUR   351,489.35 (not to be added to the confiscation ordered by Italian courts). Court of Audit (Valle d’Aosta Section), 18/02/2009 : the applicant was found liable towards the Valle d’Aosta Region and ordered to pay damages amounting to EUR 500,000. Appellate Court of Audit, 1/04/2014 (communicated on 6/05/2016) : the damage award was increased to EUR   750,487.57.