Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07ROME1229
2007-06-05 14:04:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Rome
Cable title:  

ITALY 2007 REPORT ON INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND

Tags:  EINV CASC KIDE OPIC PGOV IT 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO5825
PP RUEHFL RUEHNP
DE RUEHRO #1229/01 1561404
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 051404Z JUN 07 ZDK
FM AMEMBASSY ROME
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8233
INFO RUEHMIL/AMCONSUL MILAN PRIORITY 8700
RUEHFL/AMCONSUL FLORENCE PRIORITY 2429
RUEHNP/AMCONSUL NAPLES PRIORITY 2589
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ROME 001229 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EB/IFD/OIA AND L/CID

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EINV CASC KIDE OPIC PGOV IT
SUBJECT: ITALY 2007 REPORT ON INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND
EXPROPRIATION CLAIMS (527 REPORT)

REF: STATE 55422

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ROME 001229

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EB/IFD/OIA AND L/CID

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EINV CASC KIDE OPIC PGOV IT
SUBJECT: ITALY 2007 REPORT ON INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND
EXPROPRIATION CLAIMS (527 REPORT)

REF: STATE 55422


1. In response to reftel, the Embassy is aware of four (4)
claims of United States persons that may be outstanding
against the Government of Italy.

CLAIMS
======


2. a. Claimant A

b. 1974 - 1980

c. Claimant A, a U.S. citizen who died in September 1997,
alleged that real property in and around Rome, held by a
number of Italian companies he owned, was expropriated by the
City of Rome beginning in January 1974 and continuing through
September 1980. The court-appointed "Special Administrator"
of the estate of Claimant A has continued to pursue this
claim and maintains that the City of Rome failed to
compensate Claimant A the fair market value of the property
in contravention of the 1948 Treaty of Friendship, Commerce
and Navigation (FCN) between Italy and the United States.
Claimant A initiated legal action in Italian courts in 1983,
seeking fair market value compensation for his property. The
trial court dismissed this claim. Claimant A appealed
unsuccessfully. His case was finally rejected in 1994 by
Italy's Supreme Court of Cassation.

The Department of State has taken steps to try to evaluate
and promote resolution of this claim. As part of its
consideration, the Department has, inter alia, sought
information from the Special Administrator concerning
Claimant A's claim, including the nature of Claimant A's
ownership interests in the property and in the companies that
apparently held direct ownership of the property and urged
the Government of Italy to negotiate a resolution of this
matter directly with the Special Administrator of Claimant
A's estate.

The Special Administrator visited Rome in May 2001 and
requested the assistance of the U.S. Embassy. Embassy
officials helped put the Special Administrator in contact
with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Legal Department, which
has responsibility for Claimant A's case. In 2002, the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs informed the U.S. Embassy in Rome
that the Italian Government views this case as closed.


In June 2003, the Special Administrator and a consultant to
the Administrator met with the Ambassador at their request.
The Special Administrator and the consultant asked the
Embassy to send a diplomatic note to the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs requesting a review of the case, which the Embassy
did upon Department instructions.

In a December 29, 2003, diplomatic note (received late
January 2004),the Ministry of Foreign Affairs argued that
the property subject to expropriation belonged to two Italian
companies, of which claimant A was the major stockholder, but
not to Claimant A himself. Since the entities in question
were Italian and, therefore, subject to Italian law, the MFA
argued that the United States could not espouse the claim
under the 1948 FCN Treaty. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs
also contended that the United States could not espouse the
claim of an Italian citizen. Claimant A, born in Italy,
retained his Italian citizenship, even after he had acquired
American citizenship. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs
therefore reaffirmed its conclusion that the case is closed.

In autumn 2003, the Special Administrator and an informal
advisor contacted the White House and the Nevada delegation
of Congress to inform them about the case. In February 2004,
the Embassy informed the Office of the General Counsel, the
White House, as well as the Office of the Legal Adviser,
State Department, of the December 29, 2003, Italian
diplomatic note. The Office of the Legal Adviser, Department
of State, shared with the Special Administrator the December
29, 2003, diplomatic note.

After further review of the December 29, 2003, diplomatic
note and in close consultation with the Special
Administrator, the State Department issued instructions to
the Embassy to send another diplomatic note to the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs responding to specific points and again
requesting a review of the case. This diplomatic note was
sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in November 2004, and
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs provided a brief response
dated March 15, 2005, reiterating the Government of Italy's

ROME 00001229 002 OF 003


position that the case is closed. The Embassy informed the
State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser of the March
15, 2005, Italian diplomatic note, and the Office of the
Legal Adviser shared the note with the Special Administrator.

On March 17, 2005, the Special Administrator visited Embassy
Rome. Embassy officers had previously secured appointments
for the Special Administrator with officials in the Office of
the Prime Minister and the Foreign Ministry, but the Special
Administrator subsequently asked that the meetings be
canceled because of the March 4 Calipari (Iraq hostage)
incident. The Office of the Legal Adviser is in the process
of reviewing the Special Administrator's request that the
U.S. Government espouse the claim against the Italian
Government.

In April 2007, the Embassy received a letter from Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid notifying the Embassy that the
Special Administrator planned to come to Rome and requesting
that Embassy officials assist Estate representatives in
obtaining an appointment at the MFA to discuss the Estate's
claims. Despite a letter from the Ambassador requesting that
they meet with Estate representatives, MFA officials declined
to do so.


3. a. Claimants B

b. 1960-1972

c. Claimants B claim the City of Bari expropriated 22,000
square meters of land from them and paid for only 10,000
square meters. The City states that the Claimants must get
additional payment from the party that built on the land, the
Instituto Autonomo Case Populari (IACP). The IACP apparently
wants to pay a much lower price than the Claimants' lawyer is
seeking. Claimants' attorney brought suit. In July 1998,
the Bari court requested a new survey to determine the exact
size of the area expropriated and a new estimate of the value
of the property. A court decision was rendered in September
2002, in which the U.S. claimants were awarded 1.89 million
euros, and an additional 18,000 euros for legal expenses.
According to Italian law, the affected party, IACP, may
appeal the decision.

Consul General Naples was contacted in November 2002 by the
attorney representing the American claimants. The attorney
asked for Consul General Naples' intercession with IACP.
Consul General Naples advised the attorney that the Consulate
could not interfere in the legal process. Records do not
indicate why the attorney sought Consul General Naples
assistance, since the claimants had received a favorable
ruling in September 2002. Consul General Naples has not had
any contact with the claimants since 2002.


4. a. Claimant C

b. 1965-1974

c. Claimant C attempted to purchase approximately 250,000
square meters of land from the city of Avezzano, not far from
Rome, for an American university campus. According to
Claimant C, the land was worth $20,000 in the early 1970s but
would be worth approximately $30 million today. According to
Claimant C, in 1975-1976 the City of Avezzano accepted
payment for the land, but then failed to deliver title.
According to Claimant C, it won a favorable ruling for
damages from a court of first instance in 1986, which the
city of Avezzano appealed.

Claimant C notes it won the appeal in 1990, but the city of
Avezzano has still not complied with the court's judgment.
Various Embassy offices have played a facilitative role over
the years in this case, but have not intervened directly.
The Embassy is not aware of any developments in this case for
several years.


5. a. Claimant D

b. 1998

c. Claimant D claims the city of Bari expropriated property
owned by her in 1998. In 2006, the claimant advised the
Department of State that she was in the process of appealing
an administrative tribunal's valuation of the property
seized. The Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Embassy in
Rome, and Consul General in Naples are working to learn more
about the case, including what kind of assistance, if any,
the claimant wants from the U.S. Government. It is unclear

ROME 00001229 003 OF 003


whether or not this claim is the same, or is related to, the
claim of Claimants B, detailed above.

IDENTITIES OF CLAIMANTS
=======================


6. Identities of claimants are protected under the Privacy
Act of 1973 and cannot be released without permission of the
claimant.

Claimant A
--------------
Name: Pier Talenti
Citizenship: Naturalized American Citizen (May 15, 1961)
Privacy Act Waiver: Unknown

Claimants B
--------------
Name: Francesco Scavelli, Antonio Scavelli, Germano Scavelli,
and Bernardo Scavelli
Citizenship: American
Privacy Act Waiver: None

Claimant C
--------------
Name: American University of Rome, Inc., an Ohio nonprofit
corporation (Contact: Mr. Gioia)
Citizenship: American (by virtue of its Ohio incorporation)
Privacy Act Waiver: None

Claimant D
--------------
Name: Maria La Cedra
Citizenship: American
Privacy Act Waiver: Unknown
Spogli