Analysis of Judgment No. 11431 of 2024: Compensation for Legal Aid at State Expense

The recent judgment no. 11431 of April 29, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers important reflections on the issue of legal aid at state expense, particularly regarding the payment of fees for lawyers. In this context, the Court has established that the failure to adopt a measure concerning the request for fee payment must be regarded as a denial, paving the way for specific legal remedies for the professionals involved.

The Regulatory Context of Legal Aid at State Expense

Legal aid at state expense is governed by Presidential Decree No. 115 of 2002, which defines the methods of access and recognition of fees for lawyers. In particular, Article 170 establishes the right of the lawyer to contest the lack of recognition of fees. This article represents a fundamental tool for the protection of lawyers who operate on behalf of parties entitled to the benefits of free legal aid.

  • Article 82: conditions for admission to legal aid.
  • Article 84: rights and duties of the lawyer.
  • Article 170: remedies against the denial of fee payment.

The Principle of the Judgment and Its Meaning

Request for fee payment - Functional competence of the judge in the original proceeding - Failure to adopt a measure on said request - Equivalence to denial - Remedy - Article 170 of Presidential Decree No. 115 of 2002 - Basis. In the matter of legal aid at state expense, given the functional competence of the judge of the proceeding in which the lawyer has performed their activity, the failure to adopt a measure, whether accepting or rejecting, on that request is to be equated to a denial, against which the remedy provided for in Article 170 of Presidential Decree No. 115 of 2002 can be invoked, which is the only tool to contest the failure to recognize the fees for the lawyer of the party admitted to the benefit.

The Court emphasized that the judge of the proceeding is the only one competent to decide on such requests. This implies that, in the event of a failure to pronounce, lawyers may consider such omission as an implicit refusal and activate the remedies provided by the regulations. This principle not only protects the rights of professionals but also ensures a more equitable access to justice for the assisted parties.

Conclusions

Judgment no. 11431 of 2024 represents a significant step towards the protection of the rights of lawyers in the context of free legal aid. It clarifies that the absence of a response from the judge regarding the request for fee payment must be considered a violation of the lawyer's rights, thus allowing for appropriate contestation. It is essential, therefore, that legal professionals are informed about these provisions to ensure their proper application in future proceedings and to promote a more equitable and accessible justice system for all.

Bianucci Law Firm