SECOND SECTION
CASE OF BOCCARDI v. ITALY[1]
(Application no. 38045/97)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
28 March 2000
In the case of Boccardi v. Italy,
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
MrC. Rozakis, President,
MrM. Fischbach,
MrB. Conforti,
MrG. Bonello,
MrsV. Strážnická,
MrP. Lorenzen,
MrsM. Tsatsa-Nikolovska, Judges,
andMrE. Fribergh, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 16 March 2000,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application (no. 38045/97) against Italy lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights (« the Commission ») under former Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms » (« the Convention ») by an Italian national, Mr Luigi Boccardi (« the applicant »), on 24 July 1997. The Italian Government (« the Government ») are represented by their Agent, Mr U. Leanza, and their Coagent, Mr V. Esposito.
2. Following the entry into force of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention on 1 November 1998 and in accordance with the provisions of Article 5 § 2 thereof, the application was transferred to the Court.
3. In accordance with Rule 52 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the President of the Court, Mr L. Wildhaber, assigned the case to the Second Section. The Chamber constituted within the Section included ex officio Mr B. Conforti, the judge elected in respect of Italy (Article 27 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 26 § 1 (a) of the Rules of Court), and Mr C. Rozakis, the President of the Section (Rule 26 § 1 (a)). The other members designated by the latter to complete the Chamber were Mr M. Fischbach, Mr G. Bonello, Mrs V. Strážnická, Mr P. Lorenzen and Mrs M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska (Rule 26 § 1 (b)).
4. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of criminal proceedings against him. On 8 December 1998 the Court decided to give notice of the application to the Government and invited them to submit their observations on its admissibility and merits. The Government submitted their observations on 15 March 1999, to which the applicant replied on 20 April 1999.
5. On 31 August 1999 the Court declared the application admissible.
6. On 17 November 1999, after an exchange of correspondence, the Section Registrar suggested to the parties that they should attempt to reach a friendly settlement within the meaning of Article 38 § 1 (b) of the Convention. On 22 November 1999, 21 December 1999 and 7 February 2000, the applicant’s representative and the Agent of the Government respectively submitted formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case.
AS TO THE FACTS
7. On 14 February 1991, a neighbour filed a complaint against the applicant with the police station in Chiavari (Genoa).
On 21 November 1991, the Chiavari public prosecutor’s office summoned the applicant to appear on 29 September 1992 before the Chiavari Magistrate on charges of threats of death against the plaintiff and of poisoning his dog, and of insults.
8. The proceedings before the Chiavari Magistrate started on 22 September 1992 and ended on 11 March 1997. In a judgment delivered the same day, the Chiavari Magistrate acquitted the applicant.
AS TO THE LAW
9. On 21 December 1999, the Court received the following declaration from the Government (translation from French):
« I declare that the Government of Italy offer to pay 13,000,000 ITL to Mr Luigi Boccardi with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under No. 38045/97. This sum shall cover non-pecuniary damage as well as legal costs, and it will be payable immediately after the notification of the judgment delivered by the Court pursuant to Article 39 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.
This declaration is made taking into account the length of the proceedings but without an evaluation of the reasons which can justify such a length in domestic law.
The Government further undertake not to request the reference of the case to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the Convention. »
10. On 22 November 1999 the Court received from the applicant’s representative the following declaration signed by the applicant (translation from French):
« I note that the Government of Italy are prepared to pay 13,000,000 ITL for non-pecuniary damage as well as legal costs to me with a view to securing a friendly settlement of application No. 38045/97 pending before the Court.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims in respect of Italy relating to the facts of this application. I declare that the case is definitely settled.
This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and the applicant have reached.
I further undertake not to request the reference of the case to the Grand Chamber pursuant to Article 43 § 1 of the Convention after the delivery of the Court’s judgment. »
11. The Court takes note of the agreement reached between the parties (Article 39 of the Convention). It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court).
12. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY
1.Decides to strike the case out of the list;
2.Takes note of the parties’ undertaking not to request a rehearing of the case before the Grand Chamber.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 28 March 2000, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Erik FriberghChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
[1] This judgment is subject to editorial revision.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy