CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 22 avril 2004

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sE07C74DA { border:1.5pt double #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s7C35CBBD { border-right-style:double; border-right-width:1.5pt; border-bottom-style:double; border-bottom-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .s9A734C56 { border-right-style:double; border-right-width:1.5pt; border-left-style:double; border-left-width:1.5pt; border-bottom-style:double; border-bottom-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .sFBF10AB1 { border-left-style:double; border-left-width:1.5pt; border-bottom-style:double; border-bottom-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .s1A08084E { border-top-style:double; border-top-width:1.5pt; border-right-style:double; border-right-width:1.5pt; border-bottom-style:double; border-bottom-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s4CCA2433 { border-style:double; border-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .s2AB3D1C6 { border-top-style:double; border-top-width:1.5pt; border-left-style:double; border-left-width:1.5pt; border-bottom-style:double; border-bottom-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .sA6524EF { border-top-style:double; border-top-width:1.5pt; border-right-style:double; border-right-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .s8E7C0AC9 { border-top-style:double; border-top-width:1.5pt; border-right-style:double; border-right-width:1.5pt; border-left-style:double; border-left-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } .sAAECE211 { border-top-style:double; border-top-width:1.5pt; border-left-style:double; border-left-width:1.5pt; padding-right:4.65pt; padding-left:4.65pt; vertical-align:top } Resolution ResDH(2004)22 concerning the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights of 10 April, 22 May, 3 July, 2 October, 30 October and 11 December 2003 (Friendly settlements) in nine cases against Italy (see appendix) relating to the failure to enforce judicial eviction orders against tenants   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 April 2004 at the 879th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),   Having regard to the final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, which were delivered in the nine cases listed in the appendix to this resolution and immediately transmitted to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;   Recalling that these cases originated in applications (see appendix) against Italy, lodged with the European Court of Human Rights between 16 March 1999 and 28 November 2000 under Article 34 of the Convention by twelve Italian nationals, and that the Court declared admissible the applicants’ complaints concerning their prolonged inability to recover possession of their apartments, through lack of police assistance in enforcing judicial eviction orders against the tenants as well as the excessive length of the eviction proceedings;   Whereas in the judgments concerning these cases the Court, after having taken formal note of friendly settlements reached by the government of the respondent state and the applicants, and having been satisfied that the settlements were based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols, decided unanimously to strike these cases out of its list and took note of the parties’ undertaking not to request a re-hearing of the cases before the Grand Chamber;   Whereas under the above-mentioned friendly settlements it was agreed that the Italian Government would pay the applicants certain sums (see appendix), within three months as from the notification of the judgments;   Recalling that Rule 44, paragraph 2, of the Rules of the Court provides that the striking out of a case shall be effected by means of a judgment which the President shall forward to the Committee of Ministers once it has become final in order to allow it to supervise, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2 of the Convention, the execution of any undertakings which may have been attached to the discontinuance or solution of the matter;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having satisfied itself that, on the dates indicated in the appendix, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sums provided for in the friendly settlements and that no other measure was required in the present cases to conform to the Court’s judgment;   Recalling that, as regards the applicants’ complaints declared admissible in these cases, the Committee of Ministers is at present supervising the execution of several judgments of the Court (in particular the judgment Immobiliare Saffi of 28 July 1999) and decisions of Committee of Ministers, under former Article 32 of the Convention, finding in particular a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of the prolonged non-enforcement of judicial orders for eviction of tenants;   Whereas, in this connection, the Italian authorities informed the Committee of Ministers that they were envisaging new general measures (in addition to the adoption, in December 1998, of the law No. 431/98 “Regulations concerning the renting and the repossession of housing”, which sets inter alia the conditions, modalities and deadlines for the implementation of eviction proceedings) in order to put to an end the serious problem of non-enforcement of judicial eviction orders, so as to prevent new violations similar to those already found in the above-mentioned cases,   Declares, on the basis of the information supplied by the Government of Italy, that the Committee of Ministers has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention with respect to the commitments subscribed to in the friendly settlements reached in these cases.     Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2004)22   Details about the friendly settlements:   Case Date of the judgment   Total sum Date of payment Attene 62135/00 22/05/2003 5   500 euros 26/08/2003 Blasetti 48728/99 03/07/2003 3   000 euros 08/10/2003 Cianfanelli Banci 60663/00 30/10/2003 7   085 euros 28/01/2004 Forte and Di Giuliano 61998/00 11/12/2003 5   000 euros 11/03/2004 Matta 55674/00 10/04/2003 2   250 euros 30/06/2003 Piovano 65652/01 30/10/2003 13   085 euros 28/01/2004 Rogai 60661/00 03/07/2003 6   200 euros 07/10/2003 Santoro Franco 67076/01 02/10/2003 4   000 euros 28/11/2003 Zito and Corsi 54612/00 10/04/2003 6   085 euros 30/06/2003