CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 2 septembre 1997

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .s90A93616 { width:27.66pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. September 1997 Lapalorcia v. Italy - 25586/94 Judgment 2.9.1997 Article 6 Administrative proceedings Article 6-1 Reasonable time Length of proceedings in administrative courts: violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries. It also covers the following judgments of 2   September 1997 against Italy: De Santa (25574/94), Nicodemo (25839/94) and Abenavoli (25587/94)] I.   ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION (“REASONABLE TIME”) A.   Applicability Applicants asserted either a purely economic right ( De Santa , Lapalorcia and Abenavoli ) or an essentially economic right ( Nicodemo ); administrative authorities’ discretionary powers not in issue – cases’ private-law features predominated over public‑law features. Conclusion : Article 6 § 1 applicable (seven votes to two: De Santa , Lapalorcia and Abenavoli ; six votes to three: Nicodemo ). B.   Compliance 1.   Periods to be taken into consideration Starting-point (in each case): institution of proceedings in Regional Administrative Court (“the RAC”). End: date of deposit with registry of Consiglio di Stato’s judgment ( De Santa ); date on which RAC’s judgment became final ( Lapalorcia ); proceedings still pending ( Abenavoli and Nicodemo ). Total: from approximately six years and two months ( Lapalorcia ) to nearly seventeen years ( De Santa ). 2.   Applicable criteria Certain stages of proceedings considered in each case. Conclusion : violation (seven votes to two: De Santa , Lapalorcia and Abenavoli ; six votes to three: Nicodemo ). II.   ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Damage 1.   Pecuniary damage: not claimed ( De Santa ); claim dismissed, for lack of causal connection with violation found ( Abenavoli and Nicodemo ). 2.   Non-pecuniary damage: claim allowed in part ( De Santa , Abenavoli and Nicodemo ). 3.   Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage: claim allowed in part ( Lapalorcia ). B.   Costs and expenses Before Court: claim allowed in part ( De Santa ) – before Convention institutions: claim allowed in part ( Lapalorcia and Abenavoli ) – not claimed ( Nicodemo ). Conclusion : respondent State to pay applicants specified sums (unanimously: De Santa , Lapalorcia and Abenavoli ; eight votes to one: Nicodemo ).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes