Omission of the Prohibited Games Table: Commentary on Judgment No. 23947 of 2023

The recent judgment No. 23947 of March 21, 2023, has generated significant interest in the field of public safety and the regulation of public establishments. In particular, the Court addressed the issue of the omission of the prohibited games table, a crucial aspect for commercial activities offering games and betting. The decision of the Palermo court highlighted the responsibilities of business operators and the sanctions provided by law, offering food for thought for all those operating in the sector.

Regulatory Context

The judgment in question is based on provisions contained in the Consolidated Text of Public Security Laws (T.U.L.P.S.), specifically Articles 17, 110, and 221. These articles regulate the display of the prohibited games table and the legal consequences in case of non-compliance. In particular, Article 110, paragraph 1 of Royal Decree of June 18, 1931, No. 773, requires that managers of premises where gambling takes place visibly display the table of prohibited games, while Article 195 establishes the procedures for its validation.

Display of the prohibited games table - Omission - Offense under Article 17 in relation to Article 110, paragraph 1, T.U.L.P.S. – Existence - Display without the procedures prescribed by Article 195 of the implementing regulation – Sanction under Article 221, paragraph 2, T.U.L.P.S. – Existence. The omission of the display of the table indicating games prohibited by the Quaestor, as prescribed by Article 110, paragraph 1, Royal Decree of June 18, 1931, No. 773, is punishable by Article 17 of the aforementioned Royal Decree. Instead, the sanction under Article 221, paragraph 2, of the aforementioned Royal Decree applies if the table, duly posted, is not kept displayed in a visible place or is not correctly validated pursuant to Article 195 of the relevant implementing regulation.

Implications of the Judgment

The decision of the Palermo court highlights the importance of complying with regulations regarding the display of the prohibited games table. The Court ruled that the omission of such display constitutes an offense, with consequent sanctions. In particular, if the table is not displayed visibly or is not correctly validated, the operator may incur severe penalties, as provided for by Article 221, paragraph 2 of the T.U.L.P.S.

• Operator responsibilities: every manager must ensure the correct display of the table.
• Applicable sanctions: in case of non-compliance, criminal and administrative sanctions may be imposed.
• Controls by authorities: it is essential that competent authorities carry out periodic checks to ensure compliance with regulations.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 23947 of 2023 represents an important reminder for all business operators, emphasizing the need to comply with regulations concerning public games. The correct display of the prohibited games table is not only a legal obligation but also a fundamental measure to ensure citizen safety and the legality of commercial activities. Operators must pay attention to these obligations to avoid legal consequences and sanctions that could jeopardize their business.