Fantozzi and Others v. Italy

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 14035/23 Maurizio FANTOZZI and Others against Italy and 14 other applications

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 4 April 2024 as a Committee composed of:

Péter Paczolay , President , Gilberto Felici, Raffaele Sabato , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,

Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the retrospective application of section 1(218) of Law no. 266/2005 of 23 December 2005 to pending proceedings were communicated to the Italian Government (“the Government”).

THE LAW

Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.

The Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.

The Government acknowledged the retrospective application of section 1(218) of Law no. 266/2005 of 23 December 2005 to pending proceedings. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases.

The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicants accepting the terms of the declarations.

The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:

“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).

The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the retrospective application of section 1(218) of Law no. 266/2005 of 23 December 2005 to pending proceedings (see, for example, Agrati and Others v. Italy , nos. 43549/08 and 2 others, 7 June 2011, De Rosa and Others v. Italy, nos. 52888/08 and 13 others, 11 December 2012, Caligiuri and Others v. Italy, nos. 657/10 and 3 others, 9 September 2014 and Cicero and Others v. Italy, nos. 29483/11 and 4 others, 30 January 2020).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 (c)).

In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 25 April 2024.

Viktoriya Maradudina Péter Paczolay Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

(retrospective application of section 1(218) of Law no. 266/2005 of 23 December 2005 to pending proceedings)

No.

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Date of receipt of Government’s declaration

Date of receipt of applicant’s comments, if any

Amount awarded for pecuniary damage per applicant/household

(in euros) [1]

Amount awarded for and costs and expenses

per applicant/household

(in euros) [2]

14035/23

20/03/2023

(6 applicants)

Maurizio FANTOZZI

1946

Egidio BARTOLI

1944

Lino DE FAZI

1944

Rolando FANTOZZI

1941

Roberto STELLA

1942

Marina VALENTINI

1943

Ferrara Alessandro

Benevento

09/02/2024

12/03/2024

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to each applicant in execution of judgment no. 535/02 of the Civitavecchia District Court later reversed on appeal.

43.48

20371/23

12/05/2023

Renato TUCCI

1961

Sullam Isacco

Milan

09/02/2024

-

The Government offered to pay the applicant 40% of the sums awarded by judgment no. 684/04 of the Monza District Court and which the applicant returned, provided that he gives proof of the restitution.

20390/23

12/05/2023

Donatella FERRI

1958

The Government offered to pay the applicant 40% of the sums awarded by judgment no. 684/04 of the Monza District Court and which the applicant returned, provided that she gives proof of the restitution.

21421/23

24/05/2023

(4 applicants)

Household

Massimiliano DOMENIGHINI

1983

Maria CAMPOSANO

1957

Giuseppina DOMENIGHNI

1980

Alessandro DOMENGHINI

1988

Heirs of

Domenighini

Benedetto

The Government offered to jointly pay the applicants 40% of the sums awarded to Domenighini Benedetto by judgment no. 61/06 of the Busto Arsizio District Court and which the applicants returned, provided that they give proof of the restitution.

22008/23

24/05/2023

Giovanni PETTENON

1957

The Government offered to pay the applicant 40% of the sums awarded by judgment no. 1035/04 of the Busto Arsizio District Court and which the applicant returned, provided that he gives proof of the restitution.

26421/23

23/06/2023

Enea CRESPI

1952

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to the applicant in execution of judgment no. 198/05 of the Busto Arsizio District Court later reversed on appeal and partially returned.

26423/23

23/06/2023

Domenico DE LORENZO

1956

The Government offered to pay the applicant 40% of the sums awarded by judgment no. 685/04 of the Monza District Court and which the applicant returned, provided that he gives proof of the restitution.

26429/23

23/06/2023

Marina PARRELLA

1961

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to the applicant in execution of judgment no. 349/05 of the Monza District Court later reversed on appeal and partially returned.

26467/23

23/06/2023

Giuseppa LO IACONO

1957

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to the applicant in execution of judgment no. 349/05 of the Monza District Court later reversed on appeal and partially returned.

26471/23

23/06/2023

Patrizia STIZZOLI

1956

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to the applicant in execution of judgment no. 349/05 of the Monza District Court later reversed on appeal and partially returned.

26478/23

26/06/2023

Francesca BOSCARO

1960

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to the applicant in execution of judgment no. 349/05 of the Monza District Court later reversed on appeal and partially returned.

26515/23

23/06/2023

Salvatore CAPACCHIONE

1955

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to the applicant in execution of judgment no. 349/05 of the Monza District Court later reversed on appeal and partially returned.

26517/23

23/06/2023

Patrizia TREZZI

1962

The Government offered not to proceed with the recovery of 40% of the sums paid to the applicant in execution of judgment no. 349/05 of the Monza District Court later reversed on appeal and partially returned.

26521/23

23/06/2023

Donato DI PRETE

2022

The Government offered to pay the applicant 40% of the sums awarded by judgment no. 198/05 of the Monza District Court and which the applicant returned, provided that he gives proof of the restitution.

27280/23

23/06/2023

Patrizia CAVINATO

1962

The Government offered to pay the applicant 40% of the sums awarded by judgment no. 198/05 of the Monza District Court and which the applicant returned, provided that he gives proof of the restitution.

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable.

[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant