CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 29 juin 2005

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s69BE285C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt } .s9A223E1B { width:11.03pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sA8C2B9B0 { width:20.37pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s9F8EB0C0 { width:18.63pt; display:inline-block } .s9E97F54A { width:85.05pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   356 29.6.2005   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING SCORDINO v. ITALY (No. 1)   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Grand Chamber hearing today Wednesday 29 June 2005 at 9 a.m., in the case of Scordino v. Italy (No. 1) (application no. 36813/97).   The applicants   Giovanni, Elena, Maria and Giuliana Scordino are Italian nationals who were born in 1959, 1949, 1951 and 1953 respectively and live in Reggio Calabria (Italy).   Summary of the facts   The applicants inherited a 1,786   sq.   m plot of land in Reggio di Calabria which was subject to an expropriation permit with a view to the construction of housing. A cooperative society, Edilizia Aquila, which the district council had chosen to carry out the building work, was granted permission by the authorities to occupy the land in March 1981. On 21 March 1983 the regional council issued an expropriation order in respect of the land. In August 1984 the owner of the land asked the district council to determine the final amount of compensation for the expropriation, which was assessed in an order of 6 October 1989 at 88,414,940   Italian lire (ITL) (ITL   50,000 per square metre).   On 25 May 1990 the owner of the expropriated land brought proceedings against the district council and the cooperative in the Reggio di Calabria Court of Appeal, contesting the award of compensation. He argued that the amount was ridiculously low; that no compensation had been awarded for the period of occupation prior to the expropriation; and that, on account of the building work, a further 1,500 sq. m of land which had become unusable should also be deemed to have been expropriated.   After the death of the owner of the expropriated land in November 1992, the applicants joined the proceedings. Following the entry into force of Law no. 359/1992, the court instructed a new expert to assess the compensation for the expropriation according to the criteria laid down in the new Law. In a judgment of 17 July 1996 the Court of Appeal ordered the district council and the cooperative to pay the applicants ITL   148,041,540 (ITL 82,890 per square metre) in compensation, ITL 91,774,043 for the land which had not been expropriated but had become unusable, and a sum for the period of occupation prior to expropriation. On an appeal on points of law by the cooperative, the Court of Cassation gave judgment on 3 August 1998, deposited with the registry on 7 December 1998, acknowledging that the cooperative was not formally a party to the expropriation although it had benefited from it and upholding the remainder of the Court of Appeal’s judgment.   The applicants applied to the Reggio di Calabria Court of Appeal under the “Pinto Act”, seeking compensation for the length of the proceedings. The court awarded them an aggregate sum of 2,450   euros   (EUR) for non-pecuniary damage only and made an award in respect of procedural costs.   Complaints   Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the European Convention of Human Rights, the applicants complain of the length and unfairness of the compensation proceedings following the expropriation of their land. They also complain under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) of an infringement of their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions on account of the amount of compensation awarded and the effect of the entry into force of Law no. 359/1992 during the proceedings.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 21 July 1993 and transmitted to the Court on 1 November 1998. It was declared admissible on 27   March 2003.   In a Chamber judgment of 29 July 2004, the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.   On 26 October 2004, the Government requested that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 [1] and on 2 February 2005 the panel of the Grand Chamber accepted that request.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Luzius Wildhaber (Swiss), President , Christos Rozakis (Greek), Jean-Paul Costa (French), Nicolas Bratza (British), Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenian), Lucius Caflisch (Swiss) [2] , Corneliu Bîrsan (Romanian) Karel Jungwiert (Czech), Matti Pellonpää (Finnish), Margarita Tsatsa-Nikolovska (citizen of “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”), Rait Maruste (Estonian), Stanislav Pavlovschi (Moldovan), Lech Garlicki (Polish), Alvina Gyulumyan (Armenian), Egbert Myjer (Netherlands), Sverre Erik Jebens (Norwegian), judges , Mariavaleria Del Tufo (Italian) , ad hoc judge , Josep Casadevall (Andorran), Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Dean Spielmann (Luxemburger), substitute judges , and also Lawrence Early , Deputy Grand Chamber Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :   Nicola Lettieri , Co-agent.   Applicants :   Nicolo’ Paoletti , Alessandra Mari , Ginevra Paoletti , Counsel .     ***     After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private.   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Press contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1 November 1998 it has sat as a full-time Court composed of an equal number of judges to that of the States party to the Convention. The Court examines the admissibility and merits of applications submitted to it. It sits in Chambers of 7 judges or, in exceptional cases, as a Grand Chamber of 17 judges. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe supervises the execution of the Court’s judgments. More detailed information about the Court and its activities can be found on its Internet site. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 ‑ member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer. [2] Judge elected in respect of Liechtenstein.