Analysis of Judgment No. 18502 of 2024: Provisional Sentencing and Executive Effectiveness

The judgment No. 18502 of 2024 from the Court of Cassation, presided over by Dr. A. Scrima and reported by Dr. I. Ambrosi, addresses a matter of significant importance in the legal field: the executive effectiveness of provisional sentencing following a reform by the Court of Appeal. The court has established that, once reformed on appeal, the provisional sentence loses its nature as an executive title, generating important reflections on the practical consequences for the parties involved.

The Regulatory Context

According to Article 539 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (c.p.p.), provisional sentencing is a measure that allows the injured party to obtain immediate compensation pending the final judgment. However, the same provision states that such a sentence can be reformed on appeal, creating uncertainties regarding its executive effectiveness. The Court, in this judgment, clarifies that once reformed, it definitively loses its character as an executive title, both for the merits and for the rulings related to costs.

Effects of the Reform and New Forced Execution

In general. The provisional sentence pursuant to Article 539 c.p.p., once reformed on appeal, loses its effectiveness as an executive title, both regarding the merits and the rulings related to the costs contained therein, applying Article 336 c.p.c., and it must be excluded that, following the cassation of the appeal ruling with a referral to the civil judge under Article 622 c.p.p., the new acceptance of the original compensation request entails the revival of the executive effectiveness of the definitively annulled title, which can only serve as the basis for a new forced execution.

This principle has been applied in the case analyzed, where the Court confirmed the rejection of the opposition to the injunction regarding the return of sums paid following a reformed provisional sentence. It was deemed that the cassation of the criminal appeal judgment, which had acquitted the defendants, had no effects on the civil rights linked to the reformed provisional sentence.

  • The provisional sentence loses effectiveness once reformed on appeal.
  • The revival of the executive effectiveness of the annulled title is not possible.
  • A new executive proceeding must be initiated in case of re-acceptance of the compensation request.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 18502 of 2024 represents an important clarification regarding provisional sentencing and its executive effects. The Court of Cassation, with this decision, has reinforced the principle that the reform on appeal of a provisional sentence not only results in the loss of effectiveness as an executive title but also imposes the necessity to initiate a new proceeding to obtain compensation. This aspect becomes crucial for lawyers and their clients, as it emphasizes the importance of carefully considering the implications of a provisional sentence in the appeal stage.

Bianucci Law Firm