Published on 12 December 2022
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 23972/22
Maria Assunta BRUNO and Others
against Italy
lodged on 2 May 2022
communicated on 21 November 2022
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the application of retrospective legislation, specifically Article 1 § 218 of Law no. 266/2005 of 23 December 2005 to pending national proceedings involving the applicants.
The applicants were employed by the local government authorities. When they were transferred, under Article 8 of Law no. 124/1999, to work for the Ministry of Education, Universities and Research, their length of service with the local government authorities was not fully recognised for financial and legal purposes. The applicants lodged proceedings before the Caltanissetta District Court arguing that the conversion of their salary into a notional length of service with the new employer upon transfer had been unlawful and detrimental to them. They sought placement in the professional grade corresponding to their full length of service from the date of the transfer as well as the determination of any compensation due to them.
When those proceedings were pending before the Caltanissetta Court of Appeal, Article 1 § 218 of Law no. 266/2005 of 23 December 2005 entered into force. This provision intended to give effect to what the legislator claimed to be the original intention of the Parliament when adopting Article 8 of Law no. 124/1999. Relying on that interpretative law, the domestic court dismissed the applicants’ claims.
The applicants challenged the judgments before the Court of Cassation. In the course of the proceedings, following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 September 2011 in Scattolon, C-108/10, the Court of Cassation remitted the case to the Catania Court of Appeal for determination of whether the transferred employees had suffered a substantial loss of salary solely as a result of the transfer. The Catania Court of Appeal ruled that the applicants had not suffered a substantial loss of salary. The applicants appealed against this judgment and the Court of Cassation upheld the Court of Appeal’s findings and conclusions.
The applicants complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the legislative interference pending the proceedings which, in their view, infringed their right to a fair trial. They also complain under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that the retroactive application of Article 1 § 218 of Law no. 266/2005 of 23 December 2005 deprived them of their property insofar as this provision put an end to the dispute between them and the administration.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?
In particular, was there an interference by the legislature with the administration of justice designed to influence the judicial determination of a dispute on account of the retrospective application to their case of Article 1 § 218 of Law no. 266/2005 (see Agrati and Others v. Italy, nos. 43549/08 and 2 others, 7 June 2011, and Cicero and Others v. Italy, nos. 29483/11 and 4 others, 30 January 2020)?
If so, was that interference based on compelling grounds of general interest?
2. Has there been an interference with the applicants’ peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, considering the enactment of Article 1 § 218 of Law no. 266/2005?
If so, did the interference impose an excessive individual burden on the applicants?
3. The applicants are invited to submit a declaration concerning the status of enforcement of the domestic judgments on the merit in their regard. If a domestic judgment has been enforced in their regard, the applicants are invited to include in the declaration the following information: the number, the R.G. and the date of the judgment in their favour, the sums received, and possibly the sums subsequently recovered by the administration. The applicants are invited to provide all the relevant documents concerning the enforcement of the judgments and, where applicable, the recovery of the sums.
APPENDIX
No.
Applicant’s Name
Year of birth
Place
of residence
Proceedings
1.
Maria Assunta BRUNO
1957
Caltanissetta
Caltanissetta District Court,R.G. 1283/02,
25/06/2003
Caltanissetta Court of Appeal,
R.G. 443/03,
29/07/2005
Court of Cassation,
R.G. 19005/06 – 23052/06,
14/11/2012
Catania Court of Appeal,
R.G. 109/13,
13/04/2017
Court of Cassation,
R.G. 25075/17,
02/11/2021
2.
Sebastiano ANZALDO
1953
Butera
3.
Household
Angelo Diego Giorgio BUFALINO
Salvatore BUFALINO (heirs of Nicoló BUFALINO)
1966
Caltanissetta
1973
Bagheria
4.
Santo Domenico DI BELLA
1968
Santa Caterina Villarmosa
5.
Angelo Antonio DI BENEDETTO
1965
Caltanissetta
6.
Giuseppe DI FORTI
1961
Caltanissetta
7.
Michele DONZELLA
1955
Caltanissetta
8.
Francesca FERRARA
1959
Caltanissetta
9.
Salvatore IPPOLITO
1957
Caltanissetta
10.
Vincenzo LA TONA
1955
San Cataldo
11.
Salvatore MANGIONE
1940
San Cataldo
12.
Gaetano MARAZZOTTA
1956
Riesi
13.
Antonia MILAZZO
1951
Caltanissetta
14.
Carminella MISTRETTA
1945
Caltanissetta
15.
Giuseppe PAGLIARO
1946
Caltanissetta
16.
Bartolo RIGGI
1955
Caltanissetta
17.
Concetta Lidia RUSSELLO
1959
San Cataldo
18.
Rosario RUSSOTTO
1954
Caltanissetta
19.
Domenico SARDO
1961
San Cataldo
20.
Massimo TAGLIALAVORE
1940
Caltanissetta
21.
Michela TERRITO
1955
Caltanissetta
22.
Concetta TORREGROSSA
1959
San Cataldo