CASE OF CLUCHER v. ITALY
Violation of P1-1;Violation of Art. 6-1;Pecuniary damage - financial award;Non-pecuniary damage - financial award;Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
Christos Rozakis
8. The applicants were born in 1954, 1956 and 1952 respectively and live in Rome. 9. The applicants are the owners of a flat in Rome, which they had let to G.D. 10. In a writ served on the tenant on 19 May 1984, the applicants communicated their intention to terminate the lease and summoned the tenant to appear before the Rome Magistrate. 11. By a decision of 15 October 1984, which was made enforceable on the same day, the Rome Magistrate upheld the validity of the notice to quit and ordered that the premises must be vacated by 31 May 1987. 12. On 17 June 1987, the applicants served notice on the tenant requiring her to vacate the premises. 13. On 30 July 1987, they served notice on the tenant informing her that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 14 September 1987. 14. Between 14 September 1987 and 29 February 2000, the bailiff made thirty attempts to recover possession. 15. Each attempt proved unsuccessful as, under the statutory provisions providing for the suspension or the staggering of evictions, the applicants were not entitled to police assistance in enforcing the order for possession. 16. On 3 July 2000, the applicants recovered possession of their flat. 17. The relevant domestic law is described in the Court’s judgment in the case of Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, §§ 18-35, ECHR 1999-V.