Minasola v. Italy



In the case of Minasola v. Italy (1),

The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights,

constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of

the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms ("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2),

_______________

Notes by the Registrar

1 The case is numbered 91/1995/597/685. The first number is the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the

relevant year (second number). The last two numbers indicate the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since

its creation and on the list of the corresponding originating

applications to the Commission.

2 Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994,

apply to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9

(P9).

_______________

Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 22 January 1996, and

composed of the following judges:

Mr F. Matscher, Chairman,

Mr L.-E. Pettiti,

Mr C. Russo,

and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,

Having regard to the application against the Italian Republic

lodged with the Court on 13 October 1995 by an Italian national,

Mr Rosario Minasola, within the three-month period laid down by

Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 (art. 32-1, art. 47) of the

Convention;

Whereas Italy has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of

the Court (Article 46 of the Convention) (art. 46) and ratified

Protocol No. 9 (P9) to the Convention, Article 5 (P9-5) of which

amends Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention so as to enable a

person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals

having lodged a complaint with the European Commission of Human

Rights ("the Commission") to refer the case to the Court;

Noting that the present case has not been referred to the

Court by either the Government of the respondent State or the

Commission under Article 48 para. 1 (a) or (d) (art. 48-1-a,

art. 48-1-d) of the Convention;

Having regard to the Commission's report of 4 July 1995 on the

application (no. 24809/94) lodged with the Commission by

Mr Minasola on 12 November 1993;

Whereas the applicant complained of the length of proceedings

in an Italian civil court, to which he is a party, and alleged a

breach of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention, under

which "In the determination of his civil rights and obligations

..., everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time

by [a] ... tribunal ...";

Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his

application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of

Court B, stated that he sought a decision by the Court holding that

there had been a violation of the Convention and awarding him just

satisfaction;

Having regard to Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention and

Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,

1 Finds that

(a) the case raises no serious question affecting the

interpretation or application of the Convention, as the Court

has already established case-law on the "reasonable time"

requirement in Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention;

and

(b) the case does not, for any other reason, warrant consideration

by the Court as, in the event of a finding that there has been

a breach of the Convention, the Committee of Ministers of the

Council of Europe can award the applicant just satisfaction,

having regard to any proposals made by the Commission;

2 Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be

considered by the Court.

Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on

29 January 1996 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.

Signed: Franz MATSCHER

Chairman

Signed: Herbert PETZOLD

Registrar