• via Alberto da Giussano, 26, 20145 Milano
  • +39 02 4003 1253
  • info@studiolegalebianucci.it
  • Criminal Lawyer, Family Lawyer, Divorce Lawyer

Analysis of the Judgment of the Court of Cassation, Criminal Section III, No. 33213 of 2024: Ne bis in idem and Tax Liability

The judgment of the Court of Cassation dated August 28, 2024, No. 33213, provides significant insights into the complex issue of ne bis in idem and the liability of company executives in tax matters. This article aims to analyze the main legal issues raised by the decision, highlighting the importance of the applicable legal principles in this context.

The Principle of Ne bis in idem and Its Application

The appellant A.A. invoked the principle of ne bis in idem, arguing that an administrative sanction had already been imposed for the same facts contested in the criminal proceedings. However, the Court clarified that the tax sanction imposed on the company does not exclude the criminal liability of the legal representative, A.A., since the recipients of the two sanctions are different: the first targets the legal entity, while the second targets the individual.

The Court stated that there is no violation of ne bis in idem in the presence of distinct proceedings targeting different subjects for the same facts.

Furthermore, the Court referenced previous case law, highlighting that the overlap of sanctions is justified by the need to ensure the protection of public order and deterrence against unlawful conduct.

Liability of Executives: The Case of B.B.

In the case of B.B., the Court examined his position as a formal director, questioning the absence of specific intent. The judgment emphasized that the mere title of director cannot exclude liability when there is awareness of the unlawful management of the company.

  • It emerged that B.B. delegated the management of the company to A.A., without intervening to prevent the unlawful conduct.
  • The Court held that the figure of the unwitting frontman cannot be established in the presence of obvious signs of irregularity.
  • B.B.'s direct involvement in the management of the company strengthened the evidence of the subjective element of intent.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 33213 of 2024 from the Court of Cassation represents an important reference for understanding the dynamics of liability in tax matters. It clarifies that the distinction between administrative and criminal sanctions does not imply the cancellation of the principle of ne bis in idem when the sanctions target different subjects. Moreover, the liability of executives cannot be circumvented through mere delegation of functions but requires a careful analysis of their awareness and involvement in the unlawful acts. The Court, therefore, reaffirmed the importance of control and oversight by executives, especially in contexts of complex corporate management.