One hundred and four people have filed an appeal (pursuant to art. 840 sexiesdecies of the Code of Criminal Procedure) with the business section of the Court of Rome, against Stretto di Messina spa.
This is a collective injunction action to ask the judge to ascertain the liability of the company and the unjust damage caused due to the violation of the duty of diligence, correctness and good faith by continuing the activity for the construction of the bridge over the Strait, despite the work has no real strategic interest and is not feasible from an environmental, structural and economic perspective.
The appeal was presented electronically on 13 June by the lawyers Aurora Notarianni, Giuseppe Vitarelli, Antonino De Luca (of the Court of Messina) and Maria Grazia Fedele (of the Court of Reggio Calabria).
The class action
The appellants, with this class action, narrate the history of the company and the project and highlight the validity of their reasons by arguing that the so-called bridging decree is constitutionally illegitimate and contrary to European legislation and consequently denounce the illegitimacy of the actions of the company led by Pietro Ciucci, for violation of numerous internal and Euro-unitary, as well as international, regulations.
The clarification
The defense team specifies: “This appeal aims to ascertain and declare the proposed collective injunction action admissible and well founded. We thus want to obtain the immediate cessation by the Stretto di Messina company of any act or behavior prejudicial to collective and widespread and legally protected rights and interests, of any activity aimed at approving the definitive and executive project, of any behavior relating to the restart of the planning activity of the work and, as a result, ordering the immediate cessation of all negotiating activities, of the stipulation of additional, unilateral and contractual deeds, onerous and otherwise, and of every resolution of the Board of Directors, of every deed or document produced in the proceedings before the Via Vas Commission and the Services Conference and order the cessation of any connected and consequent activity capable of reiterating the conduct prejudicial to collective and homogeneous interests worthy of protection and prohibit its recurrence. Now, after the appeal has been filed, we await the date of the hearing.”
