CASE OF G.I.E.M. S.R.L. AND OTHERS v. ITALY
Hearing: G.I.E.M s.r.l v. Italy (no. 1828/06) , Hotel Promotion Bureau s.r.l. and Rita Sarda s.r.l. v. Italy (no. 34163/07) and Falgest s.r.l. and Gironda v. Italy (no. 19029/11) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2015-09-02 00:00:00)
Application no.: 19029/11
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2018-06-28 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0628JUD000182806
Respondent state: ITA
Articles of the Convention: 6;6-2;7;7-1;35;35-1;35-3-a;41;P1-1;P1-1-1
Judges: András Sajó;Branko Lubarda;Egidijus Kūris;Erik Møse;Guido Raimondi;Helen Keller;Iulia Motoc;Jon Fridrik Kjølbro;Khanlar Hajiyev;Kristina Pardalos;Luis López Guerra;Paul Lemmens;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Robert Spano;Yonko Grozev
Represented by: MARIANI G. ; ROTUNNO F. ; LAVITOLA G. ; MANES V. ; LANA A.G. ; SACCUCCI A. 
Issue: Law no. 47 of 28 February 1985 ; Sections 18, 19 and 20 of Law no. 47/1985, which became articles 30 and 44 of the Construction Code by Presidential Decree no. 380 of 6 June 2001 ; Article 4 § 4ter of Legislative Decree no. 78/2009 introduced by Law no. 102/2009 ; Articles 579 paragraph 3 and 676 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

Strasbourg case-law cited: A. Menarini Diagnostics S.r.l. v. Italy, no 43509/08, §§ 58-59, 27 September 2011;AGOSI v. the United Kingdom, 24 October 1986, § 55, Series A no 108;Allen v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 25424/09, 12 July 2013;Al Nashif v. Bulgaria, no 50963/99, § 123, 20 June 2002;Amuur v. France, 25 June 1996, § 50, Reports 1996-III;Anheuser-Busch Inv. v. Portugal [GC], no 73049/01, § 83, ECHR 2007 I;Baars v. the Netherlands, no 44320/98, §§ 25-32, 28 October 2003;Berland v.  France, no 42875/10, § 42, 3 September 2015;Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v. Ireland [GC], no 45036/98, § 149, ECHR 2005 VI;Bowler International Unit v. France, no 1946/06, § 67, 23 July 2009;Brosset-Triboulet and Others v. France [GC], no 34078/02, § 87, 29 March 2010;Bulena v. the Czech Republic, no 57567/00, § 37, 20 April 2004;Canády v. Slovakia, no 53371/99, § 31, 16 November 2004;Capital Bank AD v. Bulgaria, no 49429/99, § 134, ECHR 2005 XII (extracts);Del Río Prada v. Spain [GC], no 42750/09, §§ 82-88, ECHR 2013;Depalle v. France [GC], no 34044/02, § 84, ECHR 2010;Didu v.  Romania, no 34814/02, §§ 40-42, 14 April 2009;El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GC], no 39630/09, § 192, ECHR 2012;Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, § 81, Series A no. 22;Ezeh and Connors v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39665/98 and 40086/98, § 123, ECHR 2003-X;Gáll v. Hungary, no 49570/11, § 63, 25 June 2013;Giavi v. Greece, no 25816/09, § 44, 3 October 2013;Giosakis v. Greece (no 3), no 5689/08, § 41, 3 May 2011;Grande Stevens and Others v. Italy, nos. 18640/10 and 4 others, 4 March 2014;Hammerton v. the United Kingdom, no 6287/10, § 84, 17 March 2016;Hentrich v. France, § 49, 22 September 1994, , Series A no 296 A;Iatridis v.  Greece [GC], no 31107/96, §§ 55-58, ECHR 1999-II;J.A. Pye (Oxford) Ltd and J.A. Pye (Oxford) Land Ltd v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 44302/02, § 57, ECHR 2007 III;Jahn and Others v. Germany [GC], nos. 46720/99, 72203/01 and 72552/01, §§ 83-95, ECHR 2005-VI;James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 37, Series A no 98;Jamil v. France, 8 June 1995, §§ 30-31, Series A no 317 B;Janosevic v. Sweden, no 34619/97, § 68, ECHR 2002 VII;Jokela v. Finland, no 28856/95, § 45, ECHR 2002 IV;Kadubec  v. Slovakia, 2 September 1998, § 57, Reports 1998-VI;Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no 21906/04, § 142, ECHR 2008;Klouvi v. France, no 30754/03, § 48, 30 June 2011;M. v. Germany, no 19359/04, ECHR 2009;Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos. 46286/09, 52851/08, 53727/08, 54486/08 and 56001/08, § 57, 31 May 2011;Mamidakis v. Greece, no 35533/04, § 33, 11 January 2007;Paksas v. Lithuania [GC], no 34932/04, § 75, ECHR 2011 (extracts);Paraponiaris v. Greece, no 42132/06, §§ 30-33, 25 September 2008;Salabiaku v. France, 7 October 1988, §§ 27-28, Series A no 141 A;Saliba v. Malta (dec.), no 4251/02, 23 November 2004;Sociedad Anónima del Ucieza v. Spain, no 38963/08, § 74, 4 November 2014;Société Oxygène Plus v. France (dec.), no 76959/11, § 47, 17 May 2016;Sovtransavto Holding v. Ukraine, no 48553/99, § 96, ECHR 2002 VII;Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, §§ 69-74, Series A no 52;Sud Fondi srl and Others v. Italy, no 75909/01, 20 January 2009;Sud Fondi srl and Others v. Italy (just satisfaction), no 75909/01, 10 May 2012;Sud Fondi srl and Others v. Italy (dec.), no 75909/01, 30 August 2007;Taliadorou and Stylianou v.  Cyprus, nos. 39627/05 and 39631/05, §§ 27 and 56 59, 16 October 2008;Valico  S.r.l  v.  Italy (dec.), no 70074/01, ECHR 2006-III;Varvara v. Italy, no. 17475/09, § 51, 29 October 2013;Vuckovic and Others v. Serbia (preliminary objection) [GC], nos. 17153/11 and 29 others, §§ 73-74, 25 March 2014;Welch v. the United Kingdom, 9 February 1995, § 27, Series A no 307-A;Yildirim v. Italy (dec.), no 38602/02, ECHR 2003-IV;Zafranas v. Greece, no 4056/08, § 36, 4 October 2011;Zollmann v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no 62902/00, ECHR 2003 XII
Conclusion: Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Abuse of the right of application;Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Nulla poena sine lege;Conviction;Criminal offence);No violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Nulla poena sine lege;Conviction;Criminal offence);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence);Just satisfaction reserved (Article 41 - Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE