PRESS RELEASE

of the Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights

ECtHR Judgment in the case of Scuderoni v. Italy
(23 September 2025)

Today’s judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case of Scuderoni v. Italy highlighted serious shortcomings in the response of the Italian authorities to complaints of domestic violence.

Since February 2018, the applicant had turned to both civil and criminal courts. Her complaints concerned threats -often made in the presence of their child- continuous harassment and threats, as well as psychological and physical abuse. Despite the seriousness of these allegations, the authorities failed to react with the required speed, diligence, and effectiveness, thereby exposing the applicant and her child to danger. The ECtHR found that Italy had violated its positive obligations under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention due to the inadequate and delayed response to the allegations of domestic violence.

In particular, in the civil proceedings, the consideration of her application concerning custody of the child and use of the family home was subject to an excessive delay of nine months, while her request for a protection order was dismissed without any prior risk assessment. Referring to GREVIO’s baseline evaluation report on Italy, the Court noted that violence against women and children often intensifies after separation. Custody and residence arrangements frequently serve as a means of perpetuating both physical and psychological abuse, being used as tools of continuous control over the former partner and transforming parental contact into a form of post-separation abuse. In the present case, the authorities failed to take this element adequately into account, despite the applicant’s repeated emphasis on it in all her legal remedies and complaints.

In the criminal proceedings, unjustified delays were also observed: two months elapsed before her complaint was even registered, and the proceedings lasted four years in total, with four successive judges, undermining the effectiveness of the investigation. The Italian authorities failed to conduct an autonomous and proactive risk assessment or to recognize the specific dynamics and characteristics of domestic violence, even though there were clear indications of repeated threats, harassment, and physical assault.

The Court shared GREVIO’s concerns about a widespread judicial practice of downplaying violent behavior: (a) when it occurred within a short time frame at the end of a relationship, without previously recorded incidents, and was dismissed as a “momentary outburst of anger”; or (b) when the victim actively resisted. This practice led national courts to reclassify violence as mere “marital conflict,” thereby minimizing its seriousness.

In this case, there was no thorough assessment of the allegations of psychological and physical abuse, obstruction of the applicant’s right to contact, or economic violence. The domestic court, relying on a flawed evaluation, characterized the reported conduct as mere “malicious incidents” or interpersonal disputes, and unjustifiably dismissed the applicant’s credibility, despite the existence of a medical certificate issued immediately after the incident in question.

The ECtHR held that these failures demonstrated a lack of due diligence and a breach of the authorities’ duty to ensure timely and effective protection against gender-based and domestic violence, resulting in a violation of the Convention. The judgment underlines the urgent need for immediate, diligent, and deterrent measures by States to address violence against women with the seriousness required under international human rights law.

The MFHR Press Release is also available as a PDF file here.