Judgment No. 30604 of 2024: Clarifications on Confiscation in Plea Bargaining for Legal Entities

The recent judgment No. 30604 of June 20, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important clarifications on the criminal liability of entities, particularly regarding the confiscation provided for by Article 19 of Legislative Decree No. 231 of 2001. The Court, annulling without referral the decision of the Preliminary Hearing Judge of Perugia, established that the agreement of the parties in plea bargaining must necessarily extend to confiscation, as well as to all other sanctioning components of the offense.

The Context of the Judgment

The decision under examination fits within the Italian regulatory framework that governs the liability of legal entities for crimes committed in their interest. Legislative Decree No. 231 of 2001 introduced the possibility of punishing companies for criminal conduct, establishing a system of sanctions that may include the confiscation of assets. In this context, plea bargaining represents an important dispute resolution tool, but the judgment clarifies that it cannot be considered an agreement limited only to the main penalty.

Meaning of the Principle

Criminal liability of entities - Plea bargaining - Confiscation pursuant to Article 19 of Legislative Decree No. 231 of 2001 - Agreement of the parties - Necessity. In the context of the criminal liability of entities, the agreement of the parties, in the case of plea bargaining, must extend to the confiscation referred to in Article 19 of Legislative Decree of June 8, 2001, No. 231, as well as to all other sanctioning components of the offense, the determination of which cannot be left, in terms of "an" and "quantum," to the judging body.

This principle highlights a fundamental concept: the agreement reached between the parties in plea bargaining must explicitly include the confiscation of assets, without leaving room for discretion for the judge. This means that the magistrate cannot independently decide whether and how much to confiscate, but must adhere to what has been agreed upon by the parties. This aspect is crucial, as it establishes a clear boundary between the responsibilities of legal entities and the intervention of the judicial system.

Practical Implications for Companies

Companies involved in criminal proceedings must pay particular attention to this aspect. It is essential that, during negotiations for a potential plea bargain, issues related to confiscation are clarified and included in the agreement. Businesses should consider the following points:

  • Clear definition of the aspects to be negotiated, including confiscation.
  • Expert legal advice to avoid surprises in the proceedings.
  • Assessment of assets that may be subject to confiscation.

This judgment, therefore, represents an important step towards greater certainty in the procedures for the criminal liability of entities, drawing attention to the need for clear and comprehensive agreements.

Conclusions

In summary, Judgment No. 30604 of 2024 clarifies that in the context of the criminal liability of entities, plea bargaining must also include the confiscation of assets, preventing such decisions from being left to the discretion of the judge. This principle reinforces the importance of transparency and clarity in agreements between the parties, an aspect that companies must consider to better manage legal risks.

Bianucci Law Firm