Administrative Sanctions in Financial Intermediation: Commentary on Ordinance No. 21500 of 2024

The topic of administrative sanctions in the field of financial intermediation is of fundamental importance, especially in light of recent judicial rulings. Ordinance No. 21500 of July 31, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides significant clarifications regarding the terms of contestation in the case of permanent offenses, establishing an interpretative line that deserves to be explored further.

Regulatory Context and Administrative Sanctions

The reference legislation for administrative sanctions in financial intermediation is contained in Legislative Decree No. 58 of 1998, known as the Consolidated Law on Finance. In particular, Article 195 provides a term of one hundred eighty days for contesting charges. However, the central issue is how and when this term begins, especially in the case of permanent offenses.

The Principle of the Ruling

In general. Regarding administrative sanctions provided for violations of the rules governing financial intermediation activities, in the case of a permanent offense, the term of one hundred eighty days for contesting charges in the procedure outlined by Article 195 of Legislative Decree No. 58 of 1998 begins from the date of cessation of the permanence or, when there is no proof of such cessation, from the date of the ascertainment of the violation related to the specifically contested conduct.

This principle clarifies that, in the presence of a permanent offense, the term for contestation does not begin to run until the cessation of the offense itself occurs. If there is no proof of such cessation, then reference is made to the date on which the violation was ascertained. This approach prevents the deadline for contesting sanctions from being arbitrarily accelerated, ensuring greater protection for industry operators.

Practical Implications

The implications of this ruling are manifold and can be summarized in the following points:

  • Clarity on contestation terms: The Court establishes a clear timeline that allows operators to better understand their rights and obligations.
  • Protection of operators: The ruling protects operators from excessive sanctions in situations of permanent offenses.
  • Importance of proof: The necessity to provide proof of the cessation of the offense becomes crucial for the defense of operators.

It is essential for industry professionals to be aware of these provisions to avoid unexpected sanctions and to better manage the proceedings against them.

Conclusions

Ordinance No. 21500 of 2024 represents an important step forward in regulatory clarity regarding administrative sanctions in the field of financial intermediation. The distinction between permanent and non-permanent offenses and the clarification on contestation terms are elements that can significantly influence the legal strategies and operational practices of industry operators. It is essential to continue monitoring the evolution of jurisprudence to ensure a correct interpretation and application of the regulations.

Bianucci Law Firm