Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
February 1992
Golino v. Italy - 12172/86
Judgment 27.2.1992
Article 6
Article 6-1
Reasonable time
Length of civil proceedings: 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. It also covers the following judgments of 27 February 1992 against Italy: Diana (11898/85), Ridi (11911/85), Casciaroli (11973/86), Manieri (12053/86), Mastrantonio (12054/86), Idrocalce S.r.l. (12088/86), Cardarelli (12148/86) and Taiuti (12238/86).]
I.ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION ("reasonable time")
A.Period to be taken into consideration
Starting-point: filing of claim for damages in criminal proceedings (Casciaroli), institution of divorce proceedings (Taiuti) and commencement of proceedings in the District Court (the other cases).
End: date on which the last decision became final (Diana and Taiuti) or the latest date on which it could have become final (Ridi and Golino) or proceedings still pending (the other cases).
Total duration: from over seven years and eight months (Golino) to about fifteen years and eleven months (Casciaroli).
B.Applicable criteria
Reasonableness of the length of proceedings: to be assessed with reference to the criteria laid down in the Court's case-law and in the light of the circumstances of the case, which in the cases under review called for an overall assessment.
Examination in each case of various stages of the proceedings.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously in each case).
II.ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION (in so far as the applicants filed claims)
Pecuniary damage: no causal connection with the violation found (Diana, Manieri, Mastrantonio, Idrocalce S.r.l., Golino and Taiuti) or claim dismissed because of the national courts retained the possibility of redressing the financial consequences of the breach of the reasonable time requirement (Casciaroli).
Non-pecuniary damage: sum awarded (Diana, Casciaroli, Manieri, Mastrantonio, Golino and Taiuti) or finding of a violation constituted sufficient just satisfaction (Ridi and Idrocalce S.r.l. – in the event of there having been such damage in the latter case).
Costs and expenses in the domestic legal system: no causal connection with the violation found (Ridi).
Costs and expenses before the Convention organs: reimbursed in full (Manieri, Mastrantonio, Idrocalce S.r.l. and Taiuti) or in part (Diana and Casciaroli).
Interest: not appropriate to require payment thereof in the circumstances (in all the cases cited in the conclusion below).
Implementation of legislative measures: Court lacked jurisdiction to order Italy to take such steps (Idrocalce S.r.l.).
Conclusion: respondent State to pay, within three months, specified sums to the applicants Diana, Casciaroli, Manieri, Mastrantonio, Idrocalce S.r.l., Golino and Taiuti (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