003-68316-68784

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS  650  28.9.2000   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING: Finland and Italy   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following five Chamber judgments:   Section 4   (1) Peltonen v. Finland (application no. 27323/95)    Struck out   Mauno Peltonen, a Finnish national, complained, among other things, under Article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights that he had been denied a fair hearing in the proceedings regarding his entitlement to a disability pension. The European Court of Human Rights has struck out the case given the applicant’s failure to respond to its letters. The judgment is available only in English.   (2) Galgani & De Matteis v. Italy (no. 39871/98)         Violation Article 6 § 1   Mauro Galgani and Duilio De Matteis, both Italian nationals, complained about the length of the civil proceedings to which they are parties, concerning an alleged breach of contract, which have lasted more than twenty-four years and are still pending. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to have civil rights decided within a reasonable time) of the Convention and awarded each applicant 56,000,000 Italian lire (ITL) for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,500,000 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in French)   (3) De Lisi v. Italy (no. 40974/98)[1]          Violation Article 6 § 1             No violation Article 1 Protocol No. 1   Aniello De Lisi, an Italian national, complained about the length of the civil proceedings to which he was a party concerning the division of jointly owned property, which lasted more than eleven years and six months. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 but that it was not necessary to consider whether there had been a violation of the applicant’s right to property guaranteed under Article 1 Protocol No. 1 of the Convention. The Court awarded ITL 24,000,000 for non-pecuniary damage and ITL 5,000,000 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in French) (4) Brunno v. Italy (no. 43053/98)              Friendly settlement   Sabastiano Brunno, an Italian national now deceased, complained under Article 6 § 1 about the length of the civil proceedings (nearly six years) to which he was a party, regarding his entitlement to a disability pension. The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which ITL 13,000,000 is to be paid to Mr Brunno’s heir for any non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,000,000 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in French)   (5) Romano v. Italy (no. 43098/98)               Friendly settlement   Maria Giuseppa Romano, an Italian national now deceased, complained under Article 6 § 1 about the length of the civil proceedings (more than four years and six months) to which she was a party regarding her entitlement to a home help. The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which ITL 11,000,000 is to be paid to Ms Romano’s heir for any non-pecuniary damage and ITL 1,000,000 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in French)   ***   The Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site (http://www.echr.coe.int).   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts: Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)  Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17-member Grand Chamber of the Court.  In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its Protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.