Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
February 1992
Serrentino v. Italy - 12295/86
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: Cifola (13216/87), Pandolfelli and Palumbo (13218/87), Pierazzini (13265/87), Tusa (13299/87), Cooperativa Parco Cuma (12145/86), Lorenzi, Bernardini and Gritti (13301/87), and Tumminelli (13362/87).]
I.ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION ("reasonable time")
A.Period to be taken into consideration
Starting-point: entry into effect of Italy’s acceptance of the right of individual petition (Pandolfelli and Palumbo) or payment order (Tumminelli) or date of institution of proceedings in the relevant court (the other cases).
End: date on which the last decision became final (Lorenzi, Bernardini and Gritti) or latest date on which it could have become final (Cifola) or proceedings still pending (the other cases).
Total duration: from just over five years (Cifola) to eighteen years and two months (Tusa).
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 (all the cases).
Non-pecuniary damage: sum awarded (Pandolfelli and Palumbo, Pierazzini, Tusa and Serrentino) or finding of a violation constituted sufficient just satisfaction (Cifola, Lorenzi, Bernardini and Gritti, and Tumminelli, as well as Cooperativa Parco Cuma (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 (Cooperativa Parco Cuma).
Costs and expenses before the Convention organs: reimbursed in full (Pandolfelli and Palumbo, Cooperativa Parco Cuma, Serrentino and Tumminelli) or in part (Pierazzini, Tusa and Lorenzi, Bernardini and Gritti) or claim dismissed (Cifola).
Interest: not appropriate to require payment thereof in the circumstances (in all the cases).
Conclusion: respondent State to pay to the applicants, within three months, specified sums (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