Corporate Liability and Workplace Safety: The Supreme Court Ruling
Recently, the Supreme Court of Cassation issued a significant ruling (No. 31665 of 2024) concerning the criminal and administrative liability of a company for the death of two Italian technicians in Libya. The decision has raised important questions regarding the application of workplace safety regulations and the responsibility of directors. This article analyzes the key aspects of the ruling, highlighting the legal and practical implications.
The Case and the First Instance Ruling
The case involved D.D. Spa, whose directors were convicted in the first instance for manslaughter. The judges had held that the company had violated safety regulations by failing to prepare an adequate risk assessment document (DVR) that also covered the risk of kidnappings in Libya. However, the Court of Appeal of Rome subsequently acquitted the directors, stating that no criminally relevant acts had been committed.
The territorial court excluded the criminal liability of the board members, holding that M.M.'s action was the result of his own uncoordinated initiative.
The Role of Workplace Safety
The ruling underscored the importance of adhering to safety procedures, particularly in high-risk contexts such as Libya. It emerged that the workers were aware of the obligation to use naval transport for travel, and that existing regulations had generally been followed. However, M.M.'s impromptu decision to transfer the technicians by land called into question the company's liability.
- Obligation to inform about specific risks.
- Importance of delegation of duties in complex contexts.
- Assessment of administrative liability under Legislative Decree 231/2001.
Conclusions and Future Implications
The Supreme Court ruling highlights how the criminal liability of directors must be assessed in relation to their actual responsibilities and decisions made in risky situations. The company's liability, on the other hand, is contingent upon the presence of an effective organizational model and compliance with safety regulations. This case serves as an important lesson for companies operating in high-risk environments, emphasizing the importance of proper safety management and corporate responsibility.
