EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

 798

 9.11.2000

Press release issued by the Registrar

CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING SLOVAKIA,
FRANCE, ITALY, TURKEY AND PORTUGAL

The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following thirty Chamber judgments. Only Barbosa Araújo v. Portugal and Capdeville v. Portugal are final[1].

SECTION 2

(1)  Jóri v. Slovakia (no. 34753/97)  Violation Article 6 § 1

Eva Jóri, a Hungarian national, alleges that her right to a hearing within a reasonable time had not been respected in civil proceedings, which lasted five years and eleven months and are still pending, concerning the lawfulness of the restitution and subsequent sale of the house in which she had lived with her parents. The European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a hearing within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights and awarded the applicant 150,000 Slovak korunas for non-pecuniary damage. The judgment is available only in English.

(2)  Grass v. France (no. 44066/98)  Violation Article 6 § 1

Serge Grass, a French national, complained about the length of the administrative proceedings to which he was a party (seven years, ten months and twenty-three days). The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and awarded him 40,000 French francs (FRF) for non-pecuniary damage. (Judgment in French)

In the following length-of-civil-proceedings cases, the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1. The judgments exist only in French.

(3)  Zironi v. Italy (no. 37079/97) - around four years and eight months

Ivo Zironi, an Italian national. Awarded 12,000,000 Italian lira (ITL) for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 5,000,000 for costs and expenses.

(4)  F. S.p.a. v. Italy (no. 39164/98) - more than eight years and eight months

F. S.p.A, an Italian company. Awarded ITL 2,000,000 for damage and ITL 3,500,000 for costs and expenses.

(5)  Spurio v. Italy (no. 2) (no. 39705/98) - more than ten years and two months, still pending

Carlo Spurio, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 10,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,795,600 for costs and expenses.

(6)  I.F. v. Italy (no. 40968/98) - 15 years and seven months and still pending on 29 August 2000)

I.F., an Italian national. Awarded ITL 28,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 5,000,000 for costs and expenses.

(7)  Beltramo v. Italy (no. 40977/98) - more than six years and 11 months

Renzo Beltramo, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 10,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,000,000 for costs and expenses. The Court also held that it was unnecessary to examine the applicant’s complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).

(8)  Cobianchi v. Italy (no. 1) (no. 43434/98) - more than ten years and eight months

Silvano Cobianchi, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 12,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 4,000,000 for costs and expenses.

(9)  Cobianchi v. Italy (no. 2) (no. 45852/99) - more than six years and four months

Silvano Cobianchi, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 8,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 4,000,000 for costs and expenses.

(10)  Lo Cicero v. Italy (no. 45853/99) - more than 18 years and seven months

Giovanni Lo Cicero, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 45,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage.

(11)  FR. C. v. Italy (no. 45855/99) - more than five years and four months

FR.C., an Italian national. Awarded ITL 15,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,028,700 for costs and expenses.

(12)  Giuseppina Caruso v. Italy (no. 45859/99) - more than eight years and two months, still pending

Giuseppina Caruso, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 20,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,135,000 for costs and expenses.

(13)  Giuseppe Nicola and Luciano Caruso v. Italy (no. 45860/99) - nearly eight years and ten months, still pending

Giuseppe Nicola and Luciano Caruso, both Italian nationals. Each applicant awarded ITL 20,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,500,000 for costs and expenses.

(14)  Cavallaro v. Italy (no. 45861/99) - more than seven years and ten months

Giovanni Cavallaro, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 16,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 5,000,000 for costs and expenses.

The following six cases concern an Italian company, Tor Di Valle Costruzioni S.p.A.:

(15)  Tor Di Valle Costruzioni S.p.A. v. Italy (no. 1) (no. 45862/99) - more than five years and nine months, still pending. Awarded ITL 10,000,000 for damage.

(16)  Tor Di Valle Costruzioni S.p.A v. Italy (no. 2) (no. 45863/99) - more than seven years, still pending. Awarded ITL 16,000,000 for damage.

(17)  Tor Di Valle Costruzioni S.p.A v. Italy (no. 3) (no. 45864/99) - more than six years and three months, still pending. Awarded ITL 12,000,000 for damage.

(18)  Tor Di Valle Costruzioni S.p.A v. Italy (no. 4) (no. 45865/99) - more than five years and 11 months. Awarded ITL 10,000,000 for damage.

(19)  Tor Di Valle Costruzioni S.p.A v. Italy (no. 5) (no. 45866/99) - more than six years and six months, still pending. Awarded ITL 12,000,000 for damage.

(20)  Tor Di Valle Costruzioni S.p.A v. Italy (no. 6) (no. 45867/99) - more than 11 years and five months, still pending. Awarded ITL 32,000,000 for damage.

(21)  Filippello v. Italy (no. 45868/99) - nearly seven years and two months, still pending

Giorgio Filippello, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 10,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,000,000 for costs and expenses.

(22)  Chiappetta v. Italy (no. 45869/99) - around 14 years and seven months

Aldo Dante Chiappetta, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 35,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,000,000 for costs and expenses.

(23)  Ferrazzo and Others v. Italy (no. 45870/99) - more than eight years and one month and still pending on  28 August 2000

Antonio, Luca and Simone Ferrazzo and Mirella Momenté, all Italian nationals. Each applicant awarded ITL 20,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,200,000 for costs and expenses.

(24)  D’Annibale v. Italy (no. 45872/99) - around six years

Luigi D’Annibale, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 12,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage.

In the following length-of-criminal-proceedings cases to which the applicants were civil parties, the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1. The judgments exist only in French.

(25)  Savino v. Italy (no. 45854/99) - more than four years and ten months, still pending

Francesco Savino, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 8,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,000,000 for costs and expenses.

(26)  Comella and Others v. Italy (no. 45857/99) - at least 20 years and 11 months and at most 24 years and four months, still pending

Maria Maddalena, Dora and Concetto Comella and Mattea Lodato, all Italian nationals. Each applicant awarded ITL 20,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage.

(27)  Tesconi v. Italy (no. 45858/99) - more than five years and three months

Giovacchino Tesconi, an Italian national. Awarded ITL 8,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage.

SECTION 4

(28)  Göç v. Turkey (no. 36590/97) Violation Article 6 § 1

Memet Göç, a Turkish national, complained that he was denied a fair hearing on the determination of his claim arising out of his being detained and then released without charge.

The European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 regarding the lack of opportunity to respond to the submissions of the Public Prosecutor to the Court of Cassation and, unanimously, that it was not necessary to examine the applicant’s complaint concerning the lack of an oral hearing in the domestic proceedings. The Court also held that the finding of a violation constituted sufficient just satisfaction for non-pecuniary damage and awarded the applicant FRF 10,000 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in English).

(29)  Barbosa Araújo  v. Portuagal (no. 39110/97) Friendly settlement

Giselle Marie Barbosa Araújo complained under Article 6 § 1 about the length of criminal proceedings (around five years and eleven months and still pending) in which she had intervened as an assistant of the prosecuting authority. The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which 800,000 Portuguese escudos (PTE) is to be paid for any non-pecuniary damage and PTE 250,000 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in French)

(30)  Capdeville v. Portugal (no. 40250/98) Friendly settlement

Luís António Maria Capdeville complained under Article 6 § 1 about the length of civil proceedings to which he was a party (around eight years and six months and still pending). The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which PTE 100,000 is to be paid for any non-pecuniary damage and PTE 250,000 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in French)

***

The Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site (http://www.echr.coe.int).

Registry of the European Court of Human Rights
F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex
Contacts: Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)
 Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15)
Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91

The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court.

[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.