In the case of Di Ciccio v. Italy (1),
The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights,
constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of the
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2),
_______________
Notes by the Registrar
1. The case is numbered 24/1997/808/1011. The first number is the
case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the
relevant year (second number). The last two numbers indicate the
case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its
creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications
to the Commission.
2. Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994, apply
to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9 (P9).
________________
Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 22 April 1997, and composed
of the following judges:
Mr A. Spielmann, Chairman,
Mr C. Russo,
Mr J. De Meyer,
and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,
Having regard to the application against the Italian Republic
lodged with the Court on 29 January 1997 by an Italian national,
Mr Michele Di Ciccio, within the three-month period laid down by
Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 of the Convention (art. 32-1,
art. 47);
Noting that the applicant, who was initially referred to by the
letters M.D.C., agreed, after he had brought the case before the Court,
to the disclosure of his identity;
Whereas Italy has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the
Court (Article 46 of the Convention (art. 46)) and ratified
Protocol No. 9 to the Convention (P9), Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends
Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) so as to enable a person,
non-governmental organisation or group of individuals having lodged a
complaint with the European Commission of Human Rights
("the Commission") to refer the case to the Court;
Noting that the present case has not been referred to the Court
by either the Government of the respondent State or the Commission
under Article 48 para. 1 (a) or (d) of the Convention (art. 48-1-a,
art. 48-1-d);
Having regard to the Commission's report of 22 October 1996 on
the application (no. 29143/95) lodged with the Commission by
Mr Di Ciccio on 23 November 1994;
Whereas the applicant complained of the length of proceedings
in the Italian civil courts, to which he is a party, and alleged a
breach of Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1), under which
"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone
is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ...
tribunal ...";
Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his
application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of Court B,
stated that he had brought the case before the Court with the sole aim
of avoiding being time-barred by failing to observe the
three-month limit laid down in Article 32 para. 1 of the Convention
(art. 32-1) and admitted that his case did not raise any problem
concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention;
Having regard to Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) and
Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,
1. Finds that
(a) the case raises no serious question affecting the
interpretation or application of the Convention, as the
Court has already established case-law on the "reasonable
time" requirement in Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention
(art. 6-1); and
(b) the case does not, for any other reason, warrant
consideration by the Court as, in the event of a finding
that there has been a breach of the Convention, the
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe can award
the applicant just satisfaction, having regard to any
proposals made by the Commission;
2. Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be
considered by the Court.
Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on
16 May 1997 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.
Signed: Alphonse SPIELMANN
Chairman
Signed: Herbert PETZOLD
Registrar
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy