Forgery in Public Deeds and Formal Requirements: Cassation No. 16012/2025 Clarifies the Limits of "Harmless Forgery"

With the recent ruling No. 16012 of February 28, 2025 (filed April 28, 2025), the Court of Cassation, Fifth Criminal Section, returns to examine the boundaries of the crime of forgery in public deeds under Articles 476 and 479 of the Italian Criminal Code, and in particular, the controversial concept of harmless forgery. The case concerns a notary, delegated by the judge in real estate enforcement proceedings, who had certified having drafted the auction minutes in the presence of two lawyers at the court premises, a circumstance that turned out to be untrue. The Court's intervention, presided over by P. B. with M. B. as rapporteur, led to the annulment of the appellate judgment "for civil effects only," but confirmed the existence of the crime.

Factual Context of the Decision

The case arose from an appeal filed by the District Notarial Council of Rovigo (C. N. D. R.) against G. M., the notary tasked with managing a series of judicial sales. In the minutes of the proceedings, the defendant indicated:

• the presence of two lawyers as witnesses;
• the drafting of the deed "at the premises of the Court of Rovigo";
• the date and time of the auction.

Investigations revealed that the notary had never gone to the court and that the two professionals had not been present. The Court of Appeal of Venice had considered the falsity to be devoid of offensiveness; the Cassation Court, conversely, emphasized the public relevance of the deed, intended to ensure the transparency and regularity of the enforcement procedure.

The Rule of Law: Formal Requirements and Harmless Forgery

The crime of forgery in public deeds is established when the falsity affects, in addition to contents that the deed is specifically intended to prove, also formal and necessary requirements of the certification, such as the persons present, the time, and the place of the deed's formation, as attested by the public official. (Case in which the Court excluded the existence of harmless forgery in the conduct of a notary, delegated by the judge for real estate enforcement, who had certified having drafted, in the presence of two lawyers, the minutes of real estate auctions at the court premises, a place he had not visited).

The ruling clarifies that forgery in public deeds is not limited to the alteration of substantial data (price, successful bidder, identity of the parties), but also encompasses formal requirements, because:

• time, place, and presence constitute an integral part of the privileged faith of the notarial deed;
• the public official's certification under Article 357 of the Criminal Code is aimed at ensuring the certainty of the proceedings;
• the alteration of these elements undermines public trust, creating potential prejudice for third parties.

Consequently, the concept of harmless forgery – traditionally understood as a falsity incapable of harming the protected interest – cannot be invoked when the mendacious certification affects data that the law considers essential. The Court refers to consistent precedents (Cass. nn. 5896/2021, 11753/2020), consolidating a rigorous orientation.

Operational Implications for Notaries and Professionals

The ruling offers food for thought for those operating in the field of judicial sales and, more generally, for all public officials:

• Traceability of Operations: it is essential to be able to demonstrate, also through digital tools, the concrete presence at the indicated location.
• Criminal and Civil Liability: the annulment "for civil effects only" does not exclude compensation claims towards damaged parties.
• Professional Training: professional bodies should update their members on the latest case law to prevent risky behavior.

Conclusions

Cassation No. 16012/2025 strengthens the protection of public faith, extending the scope of criminal relevance even to merely formal falsities when they concern the authenticity of the deed. The message is clear: the accuracy of every single piece of data attested by the public official is essential for the validity of the deed and public trust. Notaries and professionals are therefore called to absolute rigor, under penalty of the crime of forgery in public deeds and the consequent criminal and civil liabilities.