The Constitution of Civil Party in the Abbreviated Procedure: Clarifications from the Court of Cassation (Judgment no. 9102/2025)

The role of the civil party in criminal proceedings is crucial for the victim of a crime, allowing them to obtain compensation for damages. The exercise of their rights can present complexities, especially in special procedures such as the abbreviated judgment. The recent Judgment no. 9102 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation addresses a debated aspect: the tacit revocation of the constitution of civil party, offering clarity and strengthening the guarantees for those seeking justice.

The Procedural Context and the Issue of Tacit Revocation

The abbreviated judgment (artt. 438 et seq. c.p.p.) is a special procedure that allows the defendant to obtain a reduced sentence. In this context, the civil party, having constituted themselves for their compensation claims, faces a simplified process. A frequent question concerns the fate of their constitution if, during the final discussion phase, written conclusions are not filed. The ruling of the Court of Appeal of Milan, examined by the Court of Cassation in the case of the defendant V. T. C. R., had raised doubts about a strict interpretation. The Supreme Court, presided over by G. Verga and with P. Cianfrocca as rapporteur, has instead opted for a more substantial and protective approach.

The Ruling of the Court of Cassation: When the Absence of Writing is Not Revocation

The Court of Cassation, with Judgment no. 9102/2025, establishes a fundamental principle for the protection of the victim's rights, contained in the following ruling:

In an unconditional abbreviated judgment, the failure to submit written conclusions does not determine the tacit revocation of the constitution of civil party if the defense attorney refers to the conclusions set out in the act of constitution or if oral requests relating to compensation for damages, the granting of provisional sums, or the reimbursement of costs are recorded.

This decision is of considerable practical importance. The Court clarifies that the mere absence of a final written document does not equate to an implicit waiver of the compensation claim. What matters is the clear manifestation of the will to maintain the constitution of civil party, which can occur in various forms, as alternatives to filing written conclusions. These forms include:

• The explicit reference, by the defense attorney, to the conclusions already formulated in the act of constitution of civil party (art. 76 c.p.p.).
• The recording of specific oral requests relating to compensation for damages.
• The request for the granting of a provisional sum (an advance on compensation).
• The request for reimbursement of court costs (art. 523 paragraph 2 c.p.p.).

This approach, in line with previous case law (such as judgments no. 42715/2012 and no. 29675/2016), reinforces the principle that the revocation of the constitution of civil party (art. 82 c.p.p.) cannot be presumed but must result from unequivocal acts of renunciation. The Supreme Court emphasizes that the substance of the will must prevail over mere formality.

Conclusions: Greater Guarantees for the Victim

Judgment no. 9102 of 2025 consolidates an essential principle: the protection of the rights of the civil party in the abbreviated judgment. It reiterates that substance prevails over form, provided that the will to obtain compensation is clearly manifested. This orientation not only increases legal certainty but also strengthens the victim's position in criminal proceedings, ensuring that their right to compensation for damages is not compromised by mere procedural technicalities, for the benefit of a fairer judicial system that is more attentive to the needs of those who have suffered a wrong.