CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 19 février 1991

.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 } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .sC7C396CD { width:24.89pt; 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. February 1991 Alimena v. Italy - 11910/85 Judgment 19.2.1991 Article 6 Article 6-1 Reasonable time Length of criminal proceedings: violation Article 6-3-c Defence through legal assistance Hearing before Court of Cassation held without prior notification of applicant and his lawyer: 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.] I.   ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION ("reasonable time") A.   Period to be taken into consideration Starting point: day on which applicant was charged and arrested. Close: date on which applicant learned that the Court of Cassation had dismissed his appeal. Total: more than seven years and four months. B.   Applicable criteria Reasonableness of length of proceedings: to be assessed in the light of the particular circumstances of the case, which in this instance called for overall assessment. Case not a complex one and applicant's conduct gave rise to hardly any delay. Conduct of competent authorities: no satisfactory explanation for the long periods of inactivity which occurred. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). II.   ARTICLE 6 § 3 (C) OF THE CONVENTION Failure of the competent Italian authorities to fulfil their obligation to ensure that the applicant effectively enjoyed his right to be represented by a lawyer before the Court of Cassation. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). III.   ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION Pecuniary damage: no causal connection with violation – claim dismissed. Non-pecuniary damage: sum awarded solely for violation of Article 6 §   1. Costs and expenses: reimbursed in part. Conclusion : respondent State to pay specified sums to the applicant (unanimously).   © 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