Commentary on Sentence No. 37751 of 2024: Responsibility of Entities and Archiving
Sentence No. 37751, filed on October 15, 2024, represents an important ruling by the Court of Cassation regarding the criminal liability of entities, according to Legislative Decree No. 231 of 2001. In this article, we will analyze the key points of the ruling, paying particular attention to the concept of the abnormality of compulsory charges and the implications for companies involved in criminal proceedings.
The Regulatory Context
Legislative Decree No. 231 of 2001 introduced into our legal system the criminal liability of legal entities, establishing that an entity can be held responsible for crimes committed in its interest or for its benefit. However, the law provides that if the public prosecutor requests the archiving of a suspect, and this also happens for the entity, compulsory charges cannot be imposed.
Criminal liability of entities - Request for archiving made against the suspect - Archiving order issued by the public prosecutor against the entity pursuant to Art. 58 Legislative Decree No. 231 of 2001 - Order of compulsory charges issued also against the entity - Abnormality - Existence - Reasons. In terms of criminal liability of entities, it is abnormal, as it expresses a legitimate power but exercised outside the cases normatively permitted, the provision with which the investigating judge, in the face of a request for archiving made against the suspect by the public prosecutor, who has also autonomously archived, under Art. 58 of Legislative Decree No. 231 of June 8, 2001, the procedure for the administrative responsibility of the entity, orders compulsory charges, not only concerning the suspect but also against the entity. (In application of the principle, the Court annulled without referral the order with which the judge, following the opposition of the injured party, had ordered the formulation of charges against both the natural persons and the entity, limited to the latter).
The Implications of the Ruling
The Court established that compulsory charges against an entity, in the presence of a request for archiving, are to be considered abnormal. This principle is fundamental as it reaffirms that, in the case of archiving, there is no room for an accusation that could fall on the entity if the correct procedures have not been followed. This decision aims to ensure a fair balance between the needs of justice and the protection of entities from unfounded criminal proceedings.
- Clarity on archiving procedures.
- Protection for legal entities from unjustified charges.
- Reaffirmed separation between individual responsibility and entity responsibility.
Conclusions
Sentence No. 37751 of 2024 offers an important reflection on the criminal responsibility of entities and the methods of charging. It highlights the need for strict compliance with legal procedures and a correct interpretation of existing norms. Companies must pay particular attention to these dynamics, as criminal liability is an increasingly relevant issue in the current legal context. It is essential that entities equip themselves with adequate organizational models to prevent unlawful behavior and protect themselves from potential legal consequences.
