Order No. 18037 of 2024: Financial Leasing and Anti-Usury Regulation

The order no. 18037 of July 1, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides an important clarification regarding the regulation of financial leases and the determination of usurious interest rates. In particular, the ruling focuses on the distinction between costs arising from penalties for non-performance and late payment interest, highlighting that the latter should be calculated without considering the penalties specified in the contract.

The Anti-Usury Regulation and Financial Leasing

According to Italian law, specifically Law No. 108 of March 7, 1996, the interest rate applied in a financial leasing contract must respect a maximum threshold to avoid the configuration of the crime of usury. The recent order clarifies that, for the purposes of assessing the usury threshold, costs related to penalties for early termination of the contract by the user should not be included.

NOTION, CHARACTERISTICS, DISTINCTIONS) Financial leasing - Anti-usury regulation - Determination of interest rate - Penalty on the user for early termination - Calculation - Exclusion - Basis. In the context of financial leasing, for the purpose of assessing compliance with the usury threshold of the corresponding interest rate, amounts agreed upon as penalties in the event of contract termination due to the user's non-performance should not be considered, as they are costs that fall outside the normal relationship and are merely potential, serving a completely different function than that of late payment interest.

Costs Outside the Normal Relationship

The Court has established that penalties for non-performance should not be considered in the calculation of usurious interest as they represent potential costs, not constant throughout the lease, and linked to specific situations of non-performance. This distinction is crucial to ensure the protection of the user's rights and to prevent unforeseen burdens from unjustifiably influencing the calculation of the interest rate.

  • Penalties are potential costs and not fixed.
  • They do not affect the usury threshold of the interest rate.
  • Their exclusion favors a fair interpretation of the anti-usury regulation.

Conclusions

In conclusion, order no. 18037 of 2024 represents a step forward in the regulatory clarity regarding financial leases and anti-usury regulation. The ruling not only provides practical guidance for determining the interest rate but also emphasizes the importance of protecting the user from unforeseen and potentially burdensome costs. This decision by the Court of Cassation is therefore fundamental for a correct interpretation and application of the rules concerning financial leasing, contributing to a fairer and more transparent market.

Bianucci Law Firm