Equa soddisfazione ex art. 41 CEDU e risarcimento del danno nel rapporto ‘orizzontale’ tra Corti

di Giulia Bazzoni

SOMMARIO: 1. Il rapporto tra giudicati nella vicenda di ‘Punta Perotti’ – 2. Gli effetti preclusivi e vincolanti del giudicato sovranazionale – 3. Actio finium regundorum del sindacato del giudice nazionale – 4. Divieto di duplicazione risarcitoria e principio del giudicato – 5. Il grado di coincidenza delle voci di danno tra Corte EDU e giudicato interno – 6. Considerazioni conclusive sul rapporto in fieri tra le Corti.

The article critically examines the judgments of the Italian Supreme Court (Cass. nos. 21758–21759/2025) in the Punta Perotti litigation, focusing on the contested relationship between domestic res judicata and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. It problematises the Court’s approach in attributing preclusive and quasi-res judicata effects to Strasbourg judgments, particularly in relation to compensation awarded under Article 41 of the European Convention on Human Rights and its interaction with domestic tort claims. In doing so, it questions the doctrinal foundations and systemic legitimacy of treating ECHR judgments as capable of restricting national adjudicatory competence in order to prevent allegedly duplicative compensation for the same harm. The analysis further interrogates the emerging notion of “horizontal” coordination between national and supranational judgments and damages, especially where Strasbourg decisions precede domestic proceedings.