Judgment was handed down on the 6 May 2025 by the European Court of Human Rights (the “ECtHR”) on an application made against Italy (the “Respondent”). The ECtHR ruled that the Italian authorities had failed to consider the significant harmful effects of prolonged exposure to pollution on the health of the local population.
The Applicants are 153 Italian nationals residing near a smelting foundry/plant. In 2006, the area where the plant is located was designated for residential use, on the condition that the plant was relocated. Residential development began, but the plant was never relocated. Civil and administrative proceedings found that the plant did not comply with regulations on emissions. In 2016, the national authorities took measures to reduce its impact on residents' health and the environment.
The Applicants complained that the Respondent failed to take necessary measures to protect the environment and their own well-being and alleged to be suffering from various diseases as a result of the plant’s emissions. They relied on Article 2 and Article 8 of the ECHR. They also complained that the authorities had neglected to inform them of the risks of living nearby the plant.
The Respondent maintained that the Applicants had failed to establish a causal link between the adverse effects on their health and private life and the pollution from the plant. The ECtHR agreed in part with the Respondent, ruling that the applicants living more than six kilometres from the plant could not prove a breach of Article 8 but allowed the complaints of the remaining applicants who lived in closer proximity to the plant.
The ECtHR ruled that the Italian authorities did not strike a fair balance between the applicants’ interests and the interests of society and ruled there was a breach of Article 8. Even though the Respondent set new environmental requirements and monitoring activities for the plant in 2016, these measures did not give enough weight to the fact that the local population had already been exposed to significant harmful effects from the pollution.
The Applicants also requested the ECtHR to use their power under Article 46 to indicate measures to the Respondent to remedy the situation. The court declined to do so, ruling that the Respondent State has the freedom to choose how to fulfil their obligations to the Applicants to protect their right to respect for their private lives.
The ECtHR ruled that the finding that there was a violation of the ECHR was sufficient and did not consider it necessary to award damages. They were awarded €8,700 for legal costs incurred.
Click here to read the full judgment.