CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 22 avril 1998

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s85436119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:13pt } .s941AC394 { width:129.57pt; display:inline-block } .s45AE5F73 { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .sA694BA14 { width:175.1pt; display:inline-block } .sC63A23C4 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .sC288AADB { width:140.4pt; display:inline-block } .sA68FC927 { width:137.18pt; display:inline-block } .s6F80D02A { width:62.34pt; display:inline-block } .s22CB0842 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .sB2B93316 { width:89.44pt; display:inline-block } .sC18989D6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; font-size:13pt } .s2EF16B1D { width:35.4pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s86550280 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:5.9pt; text-align:justify; font-size:13pt } .s2ED52ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:13pt }   FINAL RESOLUTION DH (98) 75   HUMAN RIGHTS   APPLICATION No. 27481/95   CRIVELLER AGAINST ITALY     (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 April 1998   at the 626th 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 Interim Resolution DH (97) 75, adopted on 28   January   1997 in the case of Criveller against Italy, in which the Committee of Ministers decided that there had been in this case a violation of Article 6, paragraph   1, of the Convention and to make public the report of the European Commission of Human Rights;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals made by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards just satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated 19 December 1996;   Whereas, at the 585th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the Commission’s proposals, held, by a decision adopted on 19   March   1997, in accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the respondent Government was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, 20 000 000 Italian lire in respect of non-pecuniary damage and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay (in accordance with the decision adopted by the Committee of Ministers at its 599th meeting (17 September 1997) on the general principles regarding the payment of default interest) at the statutory rate applicable on the date of this decision, it being understood that the interest would accrue from the expiry of the time-limit until full payment was placed at the disposal of the applicant;     Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 28 January and 19   March 1997, having regard to Italy’s obligation under Article   32, paragraph   4, of the Convention to abide by them;   Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the respondent State accordingly recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation found in this case, notably through a legislative decree of 15 November 1993 (No. 453) converted into parliamentary legislation by Act No. 19 of 14 January 1994, which amended the organisation of the Court of Audit (see Resolution DH (94) 25 in the case of Giancarlo Lombardo against Italy), and that the Commission’s report as well as the Committee of Ministers’ decisions had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on 28 May 1997, within the time-limit set, the Government of the respondent State paid the applicant the sum of 20 000 000 Italian lire as just satisfaction,   Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of Italy, that it has exercised its functions under Article 32 of the Convention in this case.