Judgment No. 51692 of 2023: The Issue of the Return of Seized Assets

The judgment no. 51692 of November 2, 2023, filed on December 29, 2023, addresses a crucial issue regarding the seizure of assets and their return. In particular, the Court of Liberty of Matera declared the opposition against the decision rejecting the request for return inadmissible, referring the parties to the civil judge to resolve the issue of ownership. This passage is fundamental for understanding the current legal approach in disputes related to seized assets.

The Judge's Decision and Its Implication

The execution judge, in this case, decided to transmit the matter to the civil judge, stating that such a provision is not subject to appeal. This position is based on the fact that the referral to the civil judge has an interlocutory nature and does not prejudice the rights of the parties involved. The judgment therefore emphasizes that ownership issues can be resolved in a civil context, keeping the criminal process separate and unaffected by such disputes.

Dispute over the ownership of seized items - Referral to the civil judge - Appealability - Exclusion - Reasons. The provision by which the execution judge, invested with the opposition against the rejection of the request for the return of seized assets, refers the parties to the civil judge for the resolution of the ownership issue is unassailable, as it does not have a decisive content but an interlocutory nature and does not prejudice the rights of the parties, which can be asserted in civil court.

Regulatory References and Jurisprudence

This judgment relies on several articles of the New Code of Criminal Procedure, including Article 263, which deals with oppositions in execution proceedings, and Article 667, which regulates issues of asset restitution. The choice to refer to the civil judge reflects a consolidated trend in jurisprudence, as highlighted by previous maxims that confirm this approach.

  • Maxim 31088 of 2018: Acknowledgment of inadmissibility in the case of referral to the civil judge.
  • Maxim 9108 of 2014: Clarifications on the separation of ownership issues in the criminal context.
  • Maxim 6769 of 2019: Reaffirmed interlocutory nature of the referral provision.

Conclusions

In summary, judgment no. 51692 of 2023 marks an important step in clarifying the procedures related to the return of seized assets, emphasizing the distinction between criminal and civil competencies. This approach not only protects the rights of the parties but also allows for an effective resolution of property disputes in an appropriate environment. The parties involved in similar situations must therefore consider the importance of following the proper legal channel for their claims, utilizing legal advice to navigate through the complexities of the Italian legal system.

Bianucci Law Firm