Warning: Undefined array key "HTTP_ACCEPT_LANGUAGE" in /home/stud330394/public_html/template/header.php on line 25

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/stud330394/public_html/template/header.php:25) in /home/stud330394/public_html/template/header.php on line 61
Рішення № 3063 від 2024 року: Повідомлення адвокату за місцем проживання для обвинувачених, що перебувають під вартою за кордоном. | Адвокатське бюро Б'януччі

Judgment no. 3063 of 2024: Notification to the domiciliary defender for defendants detained abroad

The recent judgment no. 3063 of 5 November 2024, filed on 27 January 2025, offers important clarifications on the procedure for notifying the summons to trial decree for defendants detained abroad. This issue is of significant importance in the context of criminal law, as proper notification is fundamental to ensuring the defendant's right to defence.

Regulatory context

The Court of Appeal of Milan, with its decision, confirmed that the notification of the summons to trial decree can be made not only to the defendant in person but also through their domiciliary defender. This approach is in line with the provisions of Article 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which lays down specific rules for notification to defendants detained abroad.

  • Art. 156 c.p.p.: General rule on personal notification.
  • Art. 169 c.p.p.: Derogatory provisions for notification to detained defendants.
  • Previous judgments: References to precedents supporting this interpretation.

The maxim of the judgment

Defendant detained abroad - Personal notification of the summons to trial decree - Necessity - Exclusion - Delivery to the domiciliary defender - Legitimacy - Reasons. The notification of the summons to trial decree for a defendant detained abroad, carried out by delivery to the domiciliary defender instead of personally, is legitimate, as in this case, the specific provisions of art. 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure apply, which are of a derogatory nature compared to those of art. 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

This maxim highlights the importance of a notification procedure that respects the defendant's rights, even if they are abroad. The Court's choice to accept notification to the domiciliary defender is based on the need to ensure proper communication of procedural events, without compromising the right to defence.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment no. 3063 of 2024 represents a significant step in the protection of the rights of defendants detained abroad. The legitimacy of notification through the domiciliary defender underscores how the Italian legal system adapts to the needs of an increasingly globalized context, while ensuring compliance with rules and fundamental rights. It is essential that legal professionals, whether lawyers or judges, take these provisions into account to ensure a fair and just trial.

Адвокатське бюро Б'януччі