CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 9 février 1996

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block }    The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),     Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 9 December 1992 by Ms Juliet Cicely, Ms Nicola Rosalind Varley, Mr John Cromwell Varley, Ms Joan Elizabeth Hartill, Mr Edwin Gentry Pitts, Mr Allan Steward Pitts and Ms Rosalind Edith Read against Italy (Application No. 22527/93);     Whereas on 2 August 1995 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and the case has not been referred to the European Court of Human Rights, neither by the Commission nor by a state entitled to do so under Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention, within the time-limit of three months from the transmission of the reports to the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers; whereas, however, within this time-limit, the applicants seized the Court in accordance with Protocol No. 9 (P9) but considering that the screening panel of the Court decided on 12 December 1995 that this case would not be considered by the Court, the Committee of Ministers is now called upon to take a decision in accordance with Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention and with Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention as amended by Article 5 of Protocol No. 9 (P9-5) for those states having ratified the latter;     Whereas in their application, as declared admissible by the Commission on 18 October 1994, the applicants complained of the excessive length of certain civil proceedings;     Whereas in its report adopted on 17 January 1995 the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention;     Whereas, at the 556th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies held on 9 February 1996, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention, that there had been in this case a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention,     Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case;     Decides to pursue the examination of the present case in accordance with Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention with a view to adopting the final resolution.