Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)84[1]
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Non-execution of court orders to evict tenants
Immobiliare Saffi and 156 other cases against Italy
(Applications, see Appendix)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),
Having regard to the judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final (see the list in Appendix II);
Recalling that the violations found by the Court in these cases are the result of systematic infringements of landlords' right to respect for their property because of failure to implement domestic court decisions ordering the eviction of the tenants, this failure results from a combination of the staggering of executions, the lack of assistance from the police and legislation authorising temporary suspension (violations of Article 6; paragraph 1 and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, see details in Appendix I);
Having invited the respondent state to inform it of measures taken in response to the Court's judgments, in the light of Italy's obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to comply with them (see Appendix I);
Having examined the information supplied by the government in accordance with the Committee's Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having assured itself that, within the deadline set, the respondent state has paid the applicants the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see details in Appendix II);
Recalling that findings of violations by the Court require, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgment, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of:
-individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
-general measures to prevent similar violations;
Having therefore asked Italy, since the first findings of violations, to take the necessary measures to erase the consequences of the violations of the applicants' rights and to resolve the underlying structural problems which led to the violations;
Having examined the information supplied to the Committee of Ministers on the individual and general measures taken (see details in appendix I);
Having noted that, since 1998, Italy has introduced reforms in this area, in particular giving courts sole authority to determine the dates of tenants' evictions, and that on a number of occasions the higher courts have made rulings protecting the rights of owners;
Noting nevertheless the persistent nature of the problem and having therefore adopted Interim Resolution ResDH(2004)72, which urged the Italian authorities to put an end without delay to the violations found in those cases where the applicants continued to be faced with the failure to execute domestic judgments and encouraged them to:
-adopt effective measures to remedy the problems in the housing sector, in particular in densely populated cities, without, however, having recourse to legislation preventing enforcement;
-make sure that the police are employed in a timely manner to enforce eviction orders;
-adopt legislative or other measures to make sure that the authorities and officials actually comply with final court judgments;
-strengthen the system of remedies in respect of failure to enforce court orders so as to enable all injured parties to establish the state's liability and obtain promptly satisfactory compensation for the losses caused by such failure;
Finding that all the domestic judgments concerning all these cases have now been enforced, thus putting an end to the violations found by the Court;
Finding also that all the measures that have now been adopted by the authorities have led to a significant reduction in the structural problem underlying these violations, as is shown by national statistical data and the very limited number of similar cases currently pending before Court, all of which relate to past events;
Noting in particular that the Italian legal system now offers several effective remedies for securing compensation where there are delays in enforcing court eviction orders, particularly through automatic compensation in the event of legislative suspension, proceedings against tenants, and proceedings against the state for failure of the police to provide assistance and for delays in judicial proceedings and enforcement (the Pinto Act);
Noting and stressing that the merits and scope of any new legislation on suspension of enforcement is now subject to review by the Italian Constitutional Court, which, in its judgment No. 155 of 2004, ruled that the existing legislative rationale could not be considered justified in the future;
Noting in this regard that this form of supervision corresponds to the requirements of the Convention;
DECLARES, after considering all the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix I), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases, and
DECIDES to close their examination.
Appendix I to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)84
Information on measures taken to comply with the judgments
in 157 cases against Italy concerning failure to enforce court eviction orders
Introductory summary of the cases
These cases concern excessive delays in enforcing court decisions ordering the eviction of tenants. Since 1947, there have been a number of changes to Italian tenancy legislation with, first, the introduction of rent control, then the statutory extension of all existing tenancies and, finally, the suspension or staggering of evictions.
The Court found that the legislation pursued a legitimate aim, since the simultaneous enforcement of numerous evictions could have posed a threat to public order. However, in all the cases where the applicants had experienced excessive delays in recovering their properties, there had not been a fair balance between the interests of the community and the right of landlords (violations of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1).
In its first judgments, the Court also ruled that the consequence of such measures should not be to prevent, invalidate or unduly delay execution of court decisions, and still less to undermine the substance of such decisions, since this would be incompatible with the principle of the rule of law (violations of Article 6§1).
I.Individual measures
All the judicial decisions in these cases have been executed and the applicants have been able to take possession of their property.
II.General measures
1) The nature of the problem underlying the violations
It should be specified from the outset that the evictions in these cases were not on account of the tenants' failure to pay rent but because their tenancies had expired. The Committee of Ministers noted in Interim Resolution ResDH(2004)72 "that the failure to enforce the court orders in these cases was the result either of legislation suspending or staggering enforcement or simply of the applicants' inability to obtain assistance from the police and that no satisfactory remedies were available to enable the applicants to establish the state's liability and obtain compensation for delays in, or lack of, enforcement".
2) 1998 reform – new procedure for staggering enforcement
The power granted to the administrative authorities – the prefects – to establish priorities for the implementation of eviction orders was abolished by Act No. 431 of 1998, which also freed rents. Following this reform, only the courts have power to order evictions, and they are also empowered to set the date of eviction (generally within six months) and to balance the interests of the owner and tenant.
Nevertheless, the Committee has found that "in spite of the legislative reforms adopted in 1998, the underlying problems which led to these cases have not been resolved, as demonstrated by the continuing stream of new applications to the Court and the fresh violations it continues to find on a systematic basis" (Interim Resolution ResDH(2004)72).
3)Further progress achieved
Three years after the adoption of the interim resolution, further progress has been made towards preventing new violations of this type. There follows an assessment of the current situation concerning the specific causes of violations and compensation for injured owners.
- Laws suspending execution
Italy has continued to enact suspensive legislation for varying periods. The scope of such laws has varied but their practical impact has continued to decline. Act No. 148 of 2005 had no tangible effect and its successor (No. 86 of 2006) limited such suspension to a few major cities and to fairly restricted categories of tenants: persons over 65, severely disabled persons and persons without the means to pay a rent. On the other hand, the most recent law (Act No. 9 of 2007) suspended implementation of eviction orders for eight months and extended its application to several other towns and cities and broader categories of tenants.
In its judgment No. 155 of 2004, the Constitutional Court ruled that the suspensions had been justified until 2003 because of their transitional and restricted nature. However, this legislative rationale could not be considered justified in the future. The matter has not been referred to the Constitutional Court since 2004, but the legislation in question is still subject to Constitutional Court review.
- Impossibility of obtaining police assistance
Under the law, police assistance must be provided, with immediate effect, via court bailiffs. However, certain violations were based on the refusal of the police, in practice, to grant assistance. Progress in this regard is shown by interior ministry statistics (). Over the last ten years (1995-2005), the annual number of evictions carried out has risen from 17 367 to 25 369, an increase of 46%, whereas court eviction orders have fallen from 23 175 to 10 953, a decline of 52%. It is clear that, on the one hand, evictions have become more numerous and more effective while, on the other, citizens find it less necessary to appeal to the courts to recover their properties.
- New applications before the European Court
Only a few applications are currently pending before the Court and all concern events in the past.
- Compensation for delays in enforcement
a) Proceedings against tenants, including those connected with suspension of evictions
Under Article 1591 of the Civil Code, tenants must compensate landlords for the late return of housing. The Court of Cassation has ruled (No. 13628 of 22/07/2004) that the burden of proof lies with the owner, but that the assessment may be based on the particular circumstances of each case and may also rely on indirect evidence (presunzioni).
The suspension laws referred to above set a ceiling on compensation equal to the rent, adjusted to take account of cost of living rises, plus 20% for the entire period when the owner was unable to benefit from his or her property (see Act No. 61/1989). In the event of suspension, owners are not required to take court action or show that they have suffered detriment. Owners are also granted tax benefits. The most recent law (Act No. 9 of 2007) stipulates that if payment is more than twenty days overdue, the suspension ceases to apply.
In its judgment No. 482 of 2000, the Constitutional Court ruled that the maximum level of compensation should not apply in any case where the conduct of the tenant rather than legislation made it impossible to re-establish possession of the property. The Court of Cassation has also ruled that the ceiling on compensation only applies during periods of suspension of eviction laid down in law.
b) Remedies against the state for failure of the police to provide assistance
In its judgment No. 3873 of 2004, confirming its previous case-law, the Court of Cassation ruled that owners who had been granted a court order were entitled to all the assistance they required from the authorities to secure its enforcement. For their part, the authorities were obliged to make police assistance available and only had technical discretion to decide on the precise moment when this should be granted.
In exercising their discretion, the authorities must abide by the following principles: a. court orders must be carried out at once, b. rapid assistance must be provided, c. structural deficiencies in police arrangements do not exempt the authorities, d. court bailiffs must be informed in advance of any occasional inability of the authorities to take action, e. refusal to provide assistance on a date indicated by a bailiff must be assessed in terms of whether an alternative time or, exceptionally, day has been specified and whether reasons for not providing assistance have been given for each case in question, f. any inability to offer assistance must be assessed with particular strictness.
The Court of Cassation has also stated that where the police fail to provide assistance, owners are entitled to seek damages from the authorities in the ordinary courts. Effectively, the Court has made it clear that compensation is an essential minimum safeguard to protect constitutional rights, including the enforcement of a court order, since the right to bring legal proceedings extends to the execution of judicial decisions. In actions for damages, the authorities must show that it was impossible for them to provide assistance and can only be exempted from this requirement in exceptional and unforeseeable circumstances. The Court has stated in this regard that, far from constituting such a circumstance, situations of permanent judicial or administrative crisis create a presumption that the authorities do bear responsibility.
c) Remedies against the state under the Pinto Act
Act No. 89 of 2001, which makes the state liable for detriment suffered as a result of excessively lengthy judicial proceedings, is applicable to delays in eviction proceedings against tenants. This remedy enables citizens to obtain compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage suffered.
In its judgment No. 14885 of 2002, the Court of Cassation stated that in assessing length of proceedings, account also had to be taken of delays caused by the application of legislation suspending enforcement. In its inadmissibility decision in the Provvedi case (2/12/2004, application No. 66644/01), the Court ruled that proceedings under the Pinto Act were one of the remedies to be exhausted in this type of case to comply with Article 35§1 of the Convention, in connection with complaints based on both Article 6§1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
4. Publication and dissemination of the European Court's judgment
The Immobiliare Saffi judgment and the Court's case-law concerning this group of cases has been published and commented on in several legal journals, including Rivista internazionale dei diritti dell'uomo, No. 1/2000, Documenti Giustizia n. 1-2/2000, Guida al diritto n.5/2003. Some of the judgments concerning this group of cases have been published on Italian legal sites on the Internet (see ).
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures taken have erased the consequences of the violations found in respect of applicants and will prevent further violations of this sort and that Italy has therefore fulfilled its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
Appendix II to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)84
Application
Case, date of judgment,
final on
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Currency
Date of payment
22774/93
Immobiliare Saffi, judgment of 28/07/99
28 440 150
5 000 000
ITL
14/10/1999
66441/01
A.G. No. 4, judgment of 09/10/03, final on 09/01/04
7 000
1 786,83
€
04/02/2004
22534/93
A.O., judgment of 30/05/00, final on 30/08/00
50 000 000
6 000 000
6 789 823
ITL
12/12/2000
20177/92
Aldini, Interim Resolution DH(97)413 of 17/09/97
1 000 000
16 000 000
4 000 000
ITL
26/03/1999
30878/96
Alfano, judgment of 11/12/03, final on 11/03/04
8 750
3 000
2 000
€
20/05/2004
38011/97
Aponte, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
3 000
1 500
€
30/10/2003
35550/97
Auditore, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
1 200
3 000
1 500
€
19/05/2003
66920/01
Battistoni, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
3 000
2 000
€
28/01/2004
64098/00
Bellini Franco No. 2, judgment of 11/03/2004, final on 11/06/2004
3 000
4 500
€
29/11/2004
64258/01
Bellini, judgment of 29/01/04, final on 29/04/04
3 000
4 500
€
01/08/2004
37110/97
Bertuccelli Marco, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
5 000
2 500
€
21/05/2004
65413/01
Bonamassa, judgment of 02/10/03, final on 02/01/04
6 000
3 500
€
09/03/2004
62849/00
Brienza, judgment of 16/10/03, final on 16/01/04
16 000
6 000
3 000
€
09/03/2004
34999/97
C. Spa, judgment of 03/04/03, final on 03/07/03
35 000
2 000
€
12/11/2003
35428/97
C.T. No. 2, judgment of 09/01/03, final on 09/04/03
8 000
2 250
€
09/07/2003
63947/00
Calosi, judgment of 16/10/03, final on 16/01/04
3 000
1 000
€
09/03/2004
61665/00
Calvanese and Spitaletta, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
15 000
4 600
€
07/04/2004
59636/00
Calvo, judgment of 11/03/2004, final on 11/06/2004
15 000
1 500
€
17/11/2004
28724/95
Capitanio, judgment of 11/07/02, final on 11/10/02
16 500
5 000
7 241,70
€
21/01/2003
45006/98
Capurso, judgment of 03/04/03, final on 03/07/03
28 000
10 000
500
€
10/09/2003
52081/99
Caracciolo, judgment of 14/10/2004, final on 14/01/2005
3 000
4 000
€
31/01/2005
48842/99
Carbone Anna, judgment of 22/05/03, final on 22/08/03
3 000
1 000
€
24/10/2003
31925/96
Carignani, judgment of 11/12/03, final on 11/03/04
8 000
8 000
1 500
€
21/04/2004
35777/97
Carloni and Bruni, judgment of 09/01/03, final on 09/04/03
12 800
20 000
€
30/06/2003
34819/97
Cau, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
3 995,51
4 000
1 500
€
07/05/2003
56717/00
Cavicchi and Ruggeri, judgment of 30/10/03, final on 30/01/04
32 793
9 000
2 100
€
23/03/2004
34412/97
Ciccariello Franca, judgment of 09/01/03, final on 09/04/03
13 000
6 000
2 000
€
01/07/2003
30879/96
Ciliberti Raffaele, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
3 000
4 000
2 000
€
19/05/2003
Application
Case, date of judgment, final on
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Currency
Date of payment
55161/00
Cima, judgment of 28/07/2005, final on 28/10/2005
3 000
3 000
€
27/02/2006
68345/01
Ciucci, judgment of 01/06/2006, final on 01/09/2006
0
0
0
€
36268/97
Clucher No. 2, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 24/09/03
57 000
9 000
900
€
28/11/2003
45356/99
Conti Lorenza, judgment of 10/07/03, final on 03/12/03
10 000
1 700
€
04/02/2004
19830/03
Cuccaro Granatelli, judgment of 08/12/2005, final on 08/03/2006
8 000
3 500
€
28/03/2006
63938/00
Cucinotta Rosario and Giovanni, judgment of 30/10/03, final on 30/01/04
3 000
600
€
09/03/2004
32589/96
D.V. No. 2, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
32 000
9 000
€
17/03/2003
61667/00
D'Aloe and others, judgment of 13/11/03, final on 13/02/04
27 600
7 746,84
3 000
€
23/03/2004
33113/96
D'Ottavi, judgment of 17/07/03, final on 17/10/03
3 000
2 000
€
20/01/2004
37117/97
De Benedittis, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
1 200
7 000
2 000
€
31/07/2003
59634/00
De Gennaro, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
85 700
3 000
4 059,52
€
28/01/2004
41427/98
Del Beato, judgment of 03/04/03, final on 03/07/03
9 000
6 000
2 000
€
27/08/2003
36254/97
Del Sole, judgment of 17/07/03, final on 17/10/03
6 000
4 000
€
12/12/2003
37511/97
Di Matteo, judgment of 11/12/03, final on 11/03/04
65 000
3 000
2 000
€
19/04/2004
34658/97
E.P. No. 4, judgment of 09/01/03, final on 09/04/03
6 000
€
25/08/2003
30883/96
Esposito Paola, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
4 356,96
8 000
€
07/05/2003
58413/00
Fabbri, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
3 000
2 500
€
01/04/2004
48145/99
Fabi, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
3 000
1 000
€
10/11/2003
66327/01
Federici C. and L., judgment of 09/10/03, final on 09/01/04
12 000
5 000
€
04/04/2006
67917/01
Federici Mario and others, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
10 000
5 000
€
29/09/2006
63523/00
Federici No. 2, judgment of 08/12/2005, final on 08/03/2006
14 600
3 000
1 500
€
09/03/2004
62764/00
Federici No. 2, judgment of 15/06/2006, final on 15/09/2006
26 400
3 000
3 500
€
01/04/2004
39735/98
Fegatelli, judgment of 03/04/03, final on 03/07/03
734,42
10 000
2 000
€
26/08/2003
63408/00
Ferroni Rossi, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
6 000
4 000
€
28/01/2004
60464/00
Fezia and others, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
12 000
3 600
€
29/01/2004
33909/96
Fiorani, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
21 000
8 000
2 000
€
21/05/2003
34454/97
Fleres, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
61 600
10 000
2 000
€
21/05/2003
32577/96
Folli Carè, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
36 060,05
3 000
2 500
€
23/04/2003
33376/96
Folliero, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
1 500
3 000
2 000
€
01/07/2003
Application
Case, date of judgment, final on
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Currency
Date of payment
48171/99
Fossi and Mignolli, judgment of 04/03/04, final on 04/06/04
25 000
9 000
5 100
€
05/08/2004
68008/01
Frateschi, judgment of 08/12/2005, final on 08/03/2006
10 000
2 000
€
30/03/2006
31740/96
G. and M., judgment of 27/02/03, final on 27/05/03
12 000
€
05/11/2003
43580/98
G.G. No. 6, judgment of 03/04/03, final on 09/07/03
1 200
5 000
2 000
€
08/10/2003
22671/93
G.L. No. 4, judgment of 03/08/00, final on 03/11/00
47 600 000
20 000 000
1 135 670
ITL
12/12/2000
59635/00
Gamberini Mongenet and 2 autres, judgment of 28/07/2005, final on 28/10/2005
9 000
1 200
€
02/04/2004
68707/01
Gamberini Mongenet, judgment of 06/11/03, final on 06/02/04
9 000
600
€
27/01/2006
59454/00
Gatti and others, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
7 746,83
3 999,94
€
04/02/2004
63417/00
Gelsomini Sigeri S.r.L., judgment of 18/12/03, final on 18/03/04
13 285
2 829,03
€
21/04/2004
32662/96
Geni Srl, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
9 000
2 000
€
30/06/2003
53233/99
Ghelardini and Brunori, judgment of 09/10/03, final on 09/01/04
20 833,88
18 000
3 541,06
€
04/02/2004
28272/95
Ghidotti, judgment of 21/02/02, final on 21/05/02
10 000
€
09/08/2002
31663/96
Giagnoni and Finotello, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
18 000
2 000
€
23/04/2003
62842/00
Giuliani, judgment of 04/12/23, final on 04/03/04
3 000
5 500
€
19/04/2004
63514/00
Giunta, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
10 000
3 000
2 500
€
21/04/2004
32006/96
Gnecchi and Barigazzi, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
38 126,96
10 000
2 000
€
07/05/2003
32374/96
Guidi I. and F., judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
1 000
6 000
1 500
€
21/05/2003
32766/96
Immobiliare Sole Srl, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
11 400
2 000
€
21/05/2003
34442/97
Indelicato Antonio, judgment of 06/11/03, final on 06/02/04
3 000
2 000
€
22/03/2004
64151/00
Kraszewski, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
3 000
3 000
€
28/01/2004
32392/96
L. and P. No. 2, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
1 800
1 250
750
€
07/05/2003
33696/96
L. and P. No.1, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
8 380
5 000
1 500
€
05/09/2003
32542/96
L.B. No. 3, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
10 500
8 000
1 500
€
21/05/2003
41610/98
L.M. No. 7, judgment of 03/04/03, final on 03/07/03
15 500
3 000
2 000
€
21/08/2003
62020/00
La Paglia, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
9 296,22
4 000
€
28/01/2004
63336/00
Lari, judgment of 09/10/03, final on 09/01/04
3 000
3 500
€
04/02/2004
52071/99
Leonardi Anselmo, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
3 000
2 000
€
01/04/2004
60659/00
Lerario, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
3 000
2 400
€
01/04/2004
64254/01
Liguori, judgment of 11/12/03, final on 11/03/04
16 200
3 000
3 500
€
21/04/2004
64663/01
Lo Tufo, judgment of 21/04/2005, final on 21/07/2005
10 000
€
10/11/2005
Application
Case, date of judgment, final on
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Currency
Date of payment
36149/97
Losanno and Vanacore, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
7 500
14 000
2 000
€
20/01/2004
21463/93
Lunari, judgment of 11/01/01, final on 11/04/01
330 000
15 000 000
5 800 000
ITL
22/06/2001
32391/96
M.C. No. 11, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
3 000
1 500
€
22/05/2003
31923/96
M.P., judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
36 532,37
2 000
€
21/05/2003
69143/01
Magherini, judgment of 01/06/2006, final on 01/09/2006
18 000
3 000
€
11/09/2006
42343/98
Malescia, judgment of 03/04/03, final on 03/07/03
10 000
3 000
500
€
08/07/2003
31548/96
Maltoni, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
6 300
6 000
€
19/05/2003
60388/00
Marigliano, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
5 000
3 229,90
€
28/01/2004
35088/97
Marini E., C., A.M., R. and S., judgment of 09/01/03, final on 09/04/03
20 000
15 000
1 500
€
07/07/2003
68792/01
Mascolo Sergio, judgment of 16/12/2004, final on 16/03/2005
3 000
700
€
16/05/2005
69502/01
Mazzei, judgment of 06/04/2006, final on 06/07/2006
640
6 000
2 000
€
14/09/2006
31129/96
Merico, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
10 169,12
€
07/05/2003
58408/00
Miscioscia, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
3 000
3 500
€
28/01/2004
67911/01
Molteni and Ghisi, judgment of 28/07/2005, final on 28/10/2005
6 000
2 800
€
28/12/2005
61995/00
Montanari, judgment of 11/03/2004, final on 11/06/2004
5 000
2 500
€
17/08/2004
68011/01
Mosconi, judgment of 01/06/2006, final on 01/09/2006
6 000
1 000
€
02/10/2006
58191/00
Mottola, judgment of 22/05/03, final on 22/08/03
3 000
2 000
€
22/10/2003
62848/00
Nicolai, judgment of 27/11/03, final on 27/02/04
3 000
€
01/04/2004
35024/97
Nigiotti and Mori, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
13 000
15 493,70
2 000
€
08/10/2003
24650/94
P.M. No. 1, judgment of 11/01/01, final on 5/09/01
27 784 000
20 000 000
2 000 000
ITL
03/12/2001
34998/97
P.M. No. 2, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
42 000
6 000
2 000
€
24/10/2003
15919/89
Palumbo, judgment of 30/11/00, final on 01/03/01
44 017 840
30 000 000
15 000 000
ITL
05/04/2001
37008/97
Pannocchia, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
10 000
6 197,48
2 000
€
08/10/2003
46161/99
Pepe Giuseppa, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
2 000
3 000
2 000
€
27/05/2004
60431/00
Petitta, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
6 000
3 211,48
€
19/04/2004
63543/00
Petrini Fernando, judgment of 27/11/03, final on 27/02/04
6 000
5 000
3 680
€
01/04/2004
59273/00
Picone, judgment of 11/03/2004, final on 11/06/2004
10 000
3 500
€
13/08/2004
57635/00
Poci, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
7 000
3 000
€
01/04/2004
60391/00
Pollifrone, judgment of 11/03/2004, final on 11/06/2004
5 164,56
3 500
€
24/06/2004
Application
Case, date of judgment, final on
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Currency
Date of payment
59367/00
Pozzi, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
100 000
3 000
4 200
€
13/04/2004
59539/00
Pulcini, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
18 000
10 000
€
08/10/2003
67412/01
Ragone, judgment of 02/10/03, final on 02/01/04
7 000
3 000
€
28/01/2004
67796/01
Recchi, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
56 300
3 000
4 500
€
01/04/2004
32385/96
Ricci Onorato, judgment of 17/07/03, final on 17/10/03
5 000
4 000
€
28/11/2003
55388/00
Rispoli, judgment of 30/10/03, final on 30/01/04
6 275
6 000
2 500
€
01/04/2004
50293/99
Robba, judgment of 09/10/03, final on 09/01/04
6 000
1 000
€
04/02/2004
36249/97
Rosa Massimo, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
6 700
5 000
1 500
€
24/10/2003
55725/00
Rosati, judgment of 17/07/03, final on 17/10/03
6 000
1 500
€
01/12/2003
30530/96
Rossi Luciano, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
6 500
6 000
€
07/05/2003
59538/00
Sabatini and Di Giovanni, judgment of 02/10/03, final on 02/01/04
1 540
6 000
3 800
€
28/01/2004
32644/96
Sanella, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
12 500
3 000
2 000
€
07/05/2003
31012/96
Savio Delfino, judgment of 16/10/03, final on 16/01/04
5 300
5 000
2 000
€
30/06/2003
59537/00
Savio, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
3 000
3 500
€
09/03/2004
56924/00
Scalera, judgment of 13/11/03, final on 13/02/04
87 800
3 000
8 000
€
Within deadline
61282/00
Scamaccia, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
6 000
3 000
€
01/04/2004
63414/00
Scaravaggi, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
15 000
3 000
5 000
€
19/04/2004
69834/01
Sciortino Giovanna, judgment of 28/07/2005, final on 28/10/2005
8 000
3 500
€
22/12/2005
15483/02
Scorzolini, judgment of 29/06/2006, final on 29/09/2006
3 000
2 000
€
02/11/2006
33227/96
Scurci Chimenti, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
4 740
10 000
€
07/05/2003
58607/00
Serafini, judgment of 16/10/03, final on 16/01/04
300
3 000
3 000
€
09/03/2004
47703/99
Serni, judgment of 09/10/03, final on 09/01/04
3 000
€
04/02/2004
65120/01
Siena Antonio, judgment of 11/03/2004, final on 11/06/2004
3 000
2 000
€
13/08/2004
64449/01
Soc. De.., judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
46 481
5 000
€
07/04/2004
40465/98
Sorrentino Prota, judgment of 29/01/04, final on 29/04/04
6 000
3 000
7 800
€
18/06/2004
61666/00
Spalletta, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
3 000
4 000
€
01/04/2004
68706/01
Stornelli and 3 others, judgment of 28/07/2005, final on 28/10/2005
4 100
4 000
€
29/12/2005
31223/96
T.C.U., judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
21 700
3 000
1 500
€
17/03/2003
23424/94
Tanganelli, judgment of 11/01/01, final on 11/04/01
36 318 060
15 000 000
14 726 000
ITL
04/07/2001
Application
Case, date of judgment, final on
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Currency
Date of payment
47758/99
Tassinari, judgment of 16/10/03, final on 16/01/04
3 000
29 000
3 296,49
€
23/03/2004
62000/00
Tempesti Chiesi and Chiesi, judgment of 31/07/03, final on 31/10/03
15 493,70
4 000
€
28/01/2004
62844/00
Todaro, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
32 000
3 000
5 000
€
01/04/2004
35637/97
Tolomei, judgment of 09/01/03, final on 09/04/03
5 000
4 000
2 000
€
26/06/2003
33252/96
Tona, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
20 422,80
6 000
€
07/05/2003
33204/96
Tosi, judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
19 000
€
21/05/2003
33692/96
Traino, judgment of 17/07/03, final on 17/10/03
5 000
3 500
€
20/01/2004
30972/96
V.T., judgment of 15/11/02, final on 15/02/03
19 000
5 000
1 000
€
23/04/2003
66373/01
Vietri, judgment of 04/12/03, final on 04/03/04
6 400
7 000
3 400
€
01/04/2004
48730/99
Voglino, judgment of 22/05/03, final on 22/08/03
3 000
2 000
€
31/10/2003
36377/97
Zannetti, judgment of 17/04/03, final on 17/07/03
7 400
5 000
2 000
€
29/10/2003
35006/97
Zazzeri, judgment of 19/12/02, final on 19/03/03
11 000
9 000
2 000
€
11/04/2003
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 June 2007 at the 997th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy