FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Applications no. 36816/97 and 36817/97
by Raffaele PASCULLI
against Italy
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 10 December 2002 as a Chamber composed of
SirNicolas Bratza, President,
MrM. Pellonpää,
MrA. Pastor Ridruejo,
MrsE. Palm,
MrM. Fischbach,
MrJ. Casadevall, judges,
MrsM. Del Tufo, ad hoc judge,
and Mrs F. Elens Passos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 25 January 1997,
Having regard to Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention, by which the competence to examine the application was transferred to the Court,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is an Italian national, born in 1924 and living in Foggia (Italy). He is represented before the Court by Mr Costantino Ventura, a lawyer practising in Bari (Italy).
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
1. The circumstances of the case no. 36816/97
The applicant owns land near San Ferdinando di Puglia.
By a decision of 6 August 1979, the Prefectoral Commissar (Commissario Prefettizio) of San Ferdinando started a proceedings aimed at the expropriation of part of the applicant’s land in order to build sports facilities.
On 25 September 1980, the Mayor of San Ferdinando stated that the land should be urgently occupied (“occupazione temporanea d’urgenza”) in order to start the building works.
On 23 October 1980 the authorities took possession of the land.
The applicant entered into negotiations with the Town Council with a view to fixing the amount of the compensation. By a decision of 13 March 1981, the Town Council agreed to pay an advance on the whole amount, the rest being determined according to Law No. 385 of 29 July 1980.
The Town Council paid the advance, but failed both to pay the rest of the compensation and to proceed with the formal expropriation of the applicant’s land.
The building works were not completed within the time-limit provided by law.
By a writ served on 2 July 1990 the applicant brought an action for damages against the San Ferdinando Town Council before the Foggia District Court alleging that the authorities were in possession of his property illegally as the period of the legal occupation of the land had expired without any formal expropriation or payment of compensation.
By a letter of 27 September 2002, the applicant informed the Registry that he did not intend to maintain the application before the Court, alleging that it was premature since the national proceedings were still pending.
2 The circumstances of the case no. 36817/97
The applicant owns a plot of land in San Ferdinando di Puglia.
By a decision of 5 March 1981, the Mayor of San Ferdinando stated that a part of the applicant’s plot should be urgently occupied (“occupazione temporanea d’urgenza”) in order to build a nursery.
On 2 April 1981 the authorities took possession of the land.
By a writ served on 18 May 1988 the applicant brought an action for damages against the San Ferdinando Town Council before the Foggia District Court alleging that the authorities were in possession of his land illegally as the period of the legal occupation of the land had expired without any formal expropriation or payment of compensation.
By a judgment of 30 August 2000, filed with the registry on 10 November 2000, the Foggia District Court ruled that the Foggia Municipality was to pay the applicant Italian Lire (ITL) 434,708,655 with interest and monetary evaluation.
By a letter of 27 September 2002, the applicant informed the Registry that he did not intend to maintain the application before the Court, alleging that he was satisfied with the Foggia District Court’s judgment.
COMPLAINTS
1. The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the civil proceedings.
2. The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of having been unlawfully deprived of his property pursuant to the constructive-expropriation rule.
THE LAW
On 27 October 2000, the Court invited the Government of Italy to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the applications by 19 January 2001.
By a letter of 27 September 2002, the applicant informed the Registry that he did not intend to maintain the applications before the Court. He alleged that the application no. 36816/97 was premature since the national proceedings were still pending. As to the application no. 36817/97, he alleged that he was satisfied with the national court’s judgment.
In the light of the above, the Court considers, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 a) of the Convention, that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the examination of the application to be continued.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously,
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Françoise Elens PassosNicolas Bratza
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy