Domestic Abuse and Ended Cohabitation: The Supreme Court with Ruling no. 18740/2025 Extends Protection

The end of a love affair does not always coincide with the end of problems, especially when it comes to cohabitation and, unfortunately, abuse. A recent and significant ruling by the Court of Cassation, ruling no. 18740 of 19/05/2025, sheds light on a crucial aspect of protection against domestic abuse, clarifying how the crime can persist even when the sentimental bond between cohabiting individuals has ceased. This decision offers important clarification for all those delicate situations where forced cohabitation generates a prolonged state of suffering.

The Crime of Domestic Abuse: Broad Protection

Article 572 of the Italian Criminal Code punishes anyone who abuses a family member or a cohabiting person. It is a crime of 'habitual conduct', requiring a series of harmful acts (physical, psychological, economic, moral) that create a climate of oppression and humiliation. The provision was designed to protect the psychophysical integrity of those living in a context of stable relationships, extending its application also to de facto unions and 'more uxorio' cohabitations.

Ruling no. 18740/2025: Beyond the End of Feelings

It is in this context that the relevant decision of the Court of Cassation fits. The Supreme Court, with ruling no. 18740 of 19/05/2025 (President: A. E.; Rapporteur: P. R. B.), dealt with the case of a defendant, C., whose abusive conduct towards his cohabiting partner had continued even after the deterioration of their romantic relationship. The Court of Appeal of Palermo had already confirmed the conviction, and the Court of Cassation rejected the appeal, reaffirming a fundamental principle. Here is the summary:

In matters of domestic abuse, the mere cessation of the sentimental relationship and the related common life project that originally led to the choice to establish a 'cohabitation' relevant under art. 572 of the Criminal Code, does not prevent the configuration of such a crime in relation to subsequent harassing conduct, provided that the latter is reproduced in a serial manner within a context of persistent sharing of living spaces and prolonged weakening of the victim's capacity to oppose. (Factual case where the defendant's abusive conduct towards his cohabiting partner continued even after the deterioration of the romantic relationship between the two, who were living as 'separated under the same roof').

This summary is of extraordinary importance. It clarifies that the crime of domestic abuse does not automatically cease with the end of love or common life projects. What matters for the configuration of the crime is the persistence of certain conditions of vulnerability and cohabitation. The Court emphasizes two key elements that must coexist:

• Persistent sharing of living spaces: Even if the couple is no longer sentimentally united, if they continue to live under the same roof – the situation of 'separated under the same roof' – the context of 'family' or 'cohabitation' relevant to Article 572 of the Criminal Code does not cease. Physical proximity exposes the victim to a continuous risk of oppression.
• Prolonged weakening of the victim's capacity to oppose: This is a crucial aspect. The victim, due to the past relationship, dependence (including economic or psychological) or simply the difficulty of escaping a situation of forced cohabitation, may find themselves in a state of reduced capacity to react and defend themselves. Harassing conduct, if reproduced serially, continues to undermine their integrity in this context of vulnerability.

The ruling, therefore, extends the protection of the Criminal Code even to those complex and painful situations where the affective relationship has ended, but cohabitation continues out of necessity or logistical difficulties, creating fertile ground for the continuation of violence and harassment. It is essential that victims of such conduct are aware of their rights and the protections offered by the legal system.

Conclusions: A Step Forward in Victim Protection

Ruling no. 18740 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation represents an important warning and a beacon of hope for those in situations of 'separated under the same roof' or, more generally, in worn-out but still active cohabitations. Criminal law intervenes firmly to protect individuals from harassing conduct that continues in a context of shared spaces and weakened reactive capacities. Our Law Firm is available to offer advice and support to anyone facing similar situations, ensuring effective and targeted legal protection.