4.  The applicants were respectively born in 1927 and 1929 and live in Rome. 5.  In a registered letter of 26 February 1990, the applicants informed the tenant that they intended to terminate the lease on expiry of the term on 5 October 1992 and asked him to vacate the premises by that date. 6.  In a writ served on the tenant on 28 December 1990, the applicants reiterated their intention to terminate the lease and summoned the tenant to appear before the Rome Magistrate. 7.  By a decision of 17 May 1991, which was made enforceable on the same day, the Rome Magistrate upheld the validity of the notice to quit on 5 October 1992 and ordered that the premises be vacated by 5 October 1993. 8.  Pursuant to Law no. 359/92, the expiry of the term was extended until 5 October 1994. 9.  This decision invalidated the previous writ. As a result, the applicants had to restart the eviction proceedings. 10.  On 5 April 1996, they served on the tenant a second notice to quit and summoned him to appear before the Rome Magistrate. 11.  By a decision of 20 November 1996, the Magistrate upheld the validity of the notice to quit and ordered that the premises be vacated by 20 May 1997. 12.  On 18 December 1998, the applicants served on the tenant the order to vacate the premises. 13.  On 17 February 1999, they informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 22 July 1999. 14.  On 25 October 1999, the applicants served on the tenant a second order to vacate the premises. 15.  On 4 November 1999, they informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 30 November 1999. 16.  Between 30 November 1999 and 14 April 2000, the bailiff made four attempts to recover possession. Each attempt proved unsuccessful. 17.  On 30 June 2000, the applicants recovered possession of the flat. 18.  In a registered letter of 19 February 1990, the applicants informed the tenant that they intended to terminate the lease on expiry of the term on 30 June 1991 and asked him to vacate the premises by that date. 19.  In a writ served on the tenant on 13 June 1990, the applicants reiterated their intention to terminate the lease and summoned the tenant to appear before the Rome Magistrate. 20.  By a decision of 22 June 1992, which was made enforceable on the same day, the Rome Magistrate upheld the validity of the notice to quit on 31 December 1993 and ordered that the premises be vacated by 30 September 1994. 21.  Pursuant to Law no. 359/92, the expiry of the term was extended until 31 December 1995. 22.  This decision invalidated the previous writ. As a result, the applicants had to restart the eviction proceedings. 23.  On 5 April 1995, the applicants served a second writ on the tenant with a view to terminating the lease. 24.  The tenant was then summoned to appear before the Rome Magistrate who, by a decision of 20 November 1996, upheld the validity of the notice to quit and ordered the premises be vacated by 20 November 1997. 25.  On 18 December 1998, a notice was served on the tenant requiring him to vacate the premises. 26.  On 17 February 1999, the applicants informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 22 July 1999. 27.  Between 30 November 1999 and 14 April 2000, the bailiff made 4 attempts to recover possession. Each attempt proved unsuccessful. 28.  On 29 September 2000, the applicants recovered possession of the flat.