Commentary on Judgment No. 22687 of 2024: Jurisdiction and Revocation in the Council of State

The recent order No. 22687 of August 12, 2024, issued by President D'Ascola and rapporteur Scoditti, offers important clarifications regarding jurisdiction in appeals for cassation against judgments of the Council of State. In particular, the decision focuses on the issue of revocation and the limits of appeal, highlighting how, in the context of an appeal for cassation, jurisdictional issues can only arise in relation to the jurisdictional power concerning the revocation itself.

Regulatory and Jurisprudential Context

Appeals for cassation against a judgment of the Council of State are governed by specific rules, including Articles 362 and 395 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Constitutional Court has repeatedly addressed the issue of jurisdictional limits, establishing that challenges that do not pertain to jurisdictional matters, as in the case of merits, cannot be subject to appeal.

APPEAL FOR - SPECIAL JURISDICTIONS (APPEALABILITY) - COUNCIL OF STATE Appeal for cassation against a judgment of the Council of State on an appeal for revocation - Jurisdictional issue - Configurability - Limits - Basis. In an appeal for cassation against a judgment of the Council of State rendered on an appeal for revocation, a jurisdictional issue can only arise with reference to the jurisdictional power regarding the ruling on the revocation itself, as any different challenge to the merits decision would not concern a violation of the external limits to the jurisdiction of the administrative judge, with respect to which alone recourse is permitted in a legitimacy appeal.

Implications of the Judgment

This order clarifies that in appeals for cassation against decisions of the Council of State concerning revocation, the focus must remain on the jurisdiction related to the revocation itself. This means that parties cannot raise merits-based disputes, as these are not admissible in a legitimacy appeal, representing a crucial aspect for legal practitioners. In essence, the judges establish that only jurisdictional issues can be subject to appeal, thus excluding any other evaluation.

• Risk of inadmissibility for merits-based challenges.
• Need for specific analysis on jurisdiction in case of revocation.
• Confirmation of consolidated jurisprudence on the matter.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 22687 of 2024 represents an important reference point for those operating in the field of administrative law, particularly concerning jurisdictional issues and the methods of appealing judgments of the Council of State. It highlights the importance of a correct understanding of jurisdictional limits, thereby avoiding the risk of inadmissibility for irrelevant challenges. Legal practitioners must therefore pay attention to these indications to ensure the validity of their legal actions.