Functional Jurisdiction and Derogation from Perpetuatio Iurisdictionis: Analysis of Judgment No. 44814 of 2024

The recent judgment No. 44814 of October 15, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, represents an important intervention regarding functional jurisdiction in proceedings involving magistrates. In particular, the Court ruled on the derogation of the principle of "perpetuatio iurisdictionis," clarifying how situations that arise during the trial can influence judicial competence.

The Principle of Perpetuatio Iurisdictionis

The principle of "perpetuatio iurisdictionis" establishes that once the trial has begun, the competence of the judge cannot be altered, even if new circumstances emerge that might justify a change of judge. However, the Court of Cassation acknowledged that, in specific cases, it is possible to derogate from this principle, particularly when it involves proceedings concerning magistrates. This aspect is governed by Article 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which sets out the rules for jurisdiction concerning magistrates.

Analysis of Judgment No. 44814

In the case in question, the Court held that the competence regarding proceedings involving magistrates requires consideration of emerging situations, even if these occur after the trial has begun. In particular, the Court stated:

Functional jurisdiction pursuant to Article 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - Derogation from the principle of "perpetuatio iurisdictionis" - Situations occurring after the opening of the trial - Relevance - Subsequent transmission of documents to the competent public prosecutor pursuant to Article 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - Case specifics. The competence regarding proceedings involving magistrates, established by Article 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, implies a derogation from the principle of "perpetuatio iurisdictionis," as the situation provided for by the rule must be taken into account even if it occurred or emerged after the opening of the trial, and even in the appellate stage.

In this case, the Court annulled the contested judgment and ordered the transmission of the documents to the competent public prosecutor, following the death of the original injured party and the substitution of a magistrate as a civil party.

Implications of the Judgment

The implications of this judgment are significant, as they clarify that jurisdiction can vary even at the appellate stage, should new facts or situations emerge. It is therefore essential for lawyers to carefully monitor the procedural situation and report any changes that may affect the competence of the judge. Among the key points to consider are:

  • The necessity of a careful examination of the emerging circumstances during the trial.
  • The possibility of transmitting documents to the competent public prosecutor in case of a variation in the situation.
  • The recognition of the derogation from the principle of "perpetuatio iurisdictionis" in proceedings involving magistrates.
Bianucci Law Firm