Commentary on Ordinance No. 19293 of 2024: The Accelerated Decision in Inadmissible Appeals

Recently, the Court of Cassation issued Ordinance No. 19293 on July 12, 2024, which addresses the issue of the constitutional legitimacy of Article 380-bis, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure. This provision is fundamental for managing inadmissible, unprocessable, or manifestly unfounded appeals, as it allows for an accelerated handling in chambers rather than in public hearings. The ordinance fits into a broader context where the speed of proceedings and the protection of the parties' rights are at the center of legal debate.

The Regulatory Context and the Legitimacy Issue

Article 380-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure was introduced to streamline civil proceedings, allowing the Court to decide more quickly on appeals that lack valid legal grounds. However, some legal scholars have raised doubts about the compatibility of this provision with the principles of fairness and justice, as established by Articles 24, 103, 111, 113, and 117 of the Italian Constitution, as well as Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

In particular, the appellants contested that the decision in chambers could limit the right to a fair and public trial. However, in its ruling, the Court found the issue to be manifestly unfounded.

“of Article 380-bis, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure in the part where it establishes that, in the procedure for the accelerated decision of inadmissible, unprocessable or manifestly unfounded appeals, consequent to the request for a decision made by the appellant, the Court proceeds in chambers rather than in a public hearing, as the chamber treatment meets the needs for speed and procedural economy, constitutes a procedural model capable of ensuring an effective and equitable confrontation between the parties (and is not an unreasonable expression of the discretion reserved to the legislator in shaping procedural institutions), guarantees the participation of the Attorney General (with the expected power to submit written conclusions) and does not undermine the collegial essence of the legitimacy jurisdiction (not having the proposal a decisive character, nor an anticipation of judgment by the reporting judge).”

The Implications of the Ruling

This ordinance represents an important confirmation of the validity of the accelerated procedure, highlighting how speed and procedural economy can coexist with the rights of the parties. The Court emphasized that the chamber treatment does not prejudice the right to a counter-argument, ensuring that all parties have the opportunity to express their positions, including through the participation of the Attorney General.

  • Efficiency of the judicial system.
  • Respect for the fundamental rights of the parties.
  • Clarity and transparency in proceedings.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 19293 of 2024 reiterates the importance of speed in civil justice without compromising citizens' rights. The Court has demonstrated that it is possible to find a balance between the efficiency of the process and the respect for fundamental rights, a theme of increasing relevance in the European legal landscape. The constitutional legitimacy issue raised by the appellants has thus been clearly resolved, confirming the validity of Article 380-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure and paving the way for a more practical and swift application of civil justice in Italy.

Bianucci Law Firm