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
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy