CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 19 mars 1997

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s4AB489F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:20pt } .sD8D566C3 { height:0pt; text-align:left; display:block; position:absolute; z-index:-1 } .s4ECD4776 { margin-top:104.85pt; margin-left:180.8pt; position:absolute } .s4B8D41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD227234A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s13F94BDE { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.1pt } .s2EAAAA4F { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify }   INTERIM RESOLUTION DH (97) 132 HUMAN RIGHTS APPLICATIONS Nos. 27999/95 and 28000/95   RECINELLI AND CORONA AGAINST ITALY   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 19 March 1997 at the 585th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article   32 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),   Having regard to the report drawn up on 2 July 1996 by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the applications lodged on 8 April 1995 by Mr   Mario Recinelli   and by Mr Vincenzo Corona against Italy (Applications Nos. 27999/95 and 28000/95);   Whereas on 20 August 1996 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article   32, paragraph   1, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article   48 of the Convention;   Whereas in their applications, declared admissible by the Commission on 16 April 1996, the applicants complained of the excessive length of certain civil proceedings before administrative courts;   Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   6, paragraph   1, of the Convention;   Whereas, at the 585th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by a decision adopted on 19 March 1997, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article   32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, that there had been in this case a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention,   Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case;   Decides to pursue the examination of the present case in accordance with Article 32 of the Convention with a view to adopting the final resolution.