Commentary on Judgment No. 50062 of 2023: Settlement in Appeal and Limits on the Appeal to the Court of Cassation

The recent judgment No. 50062 of 2023 by the Court of Cassation offers an important reflection on the limits of the appeal to the Court of Cassation in cases of settlement in appeal. In particular, the ruling clarifies that, in cases of settlement pursuant to Article 599-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appeal that reintroduces reasons already waived, including those related to constitutional legitimacy issues, is inadmissible.

The Meaning of Settlement in Appeal

The settlement in appeal represents an agreement between the parties that allows for the consensual resolution of the dispute, thus reducing the time and uncertainties of the process. However, as established by the judgment in question, such an agreement has significant consequences regarding the rights of appeal. In particular, the Court emphasized that the agreement limits the ability to contest in the context of legitimacy those reasons that have been waived.

The Issue of Constitutional Legitimacy

Settlement in appeal - Deductible reasons - Issue of constitutional legitimacy - Exclusion - Case. In relation to the judgment rendered following a settlement in appeal pursuant to Article 599-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appeal to the Court of Cassation is inadmissible if it reintroduces grievances related to waived reasons, including those concerning constitutional legitimacy issues, except in the case of the imposition of an illegal penalty, given that the parties' agreement limits the Court's jurisdiction to reasons not subject to waiver. (Case in which the waived ground of appeal, pertaining to the constitutionality exception of the special mitigating factor under Article 452-decies of the Criminal Code, involved waiving a more favorable sanctioning treatment than that subject to agreement).

This passage highlights how, in the case of waiving grounds of appeal, constitutional legitimacy issues can no longer be revisited, unless it concerns an illegal penalty. This implies a reflection on the conscious choice of the parties: accepting a harsher sanctioning treatment involves waiving potential advantages, and this choice must be carefully evaluated.

Conclusions

In summary, judgment No. 50062 of 2023 underscores the importance of awareness in procedural choices, especially in contexts of settlement in appeal. Parties must be prepared to waive certain rights, knowing that such waivers may preclude future challenges, including those of a constitutional nature. This aspect becomes crucial for lawyers and legal assistants who must guide their clients in strategic and informed decisions, keeping in mind the potential legal consequences.

Bianucci Law Firm