Usury and Seizure: Analysis of Judgment No. 16045 of 2023
The recent judgment No. 16045 of 2023 from the Court of Cassation provides an important reflection on the issue of the seizure of profits derived from usurious activities. This decision is part of a complex legal context, where the distinction between civil damage and criminal damage plays a crucial role.
The Concept of Seizable Profit
The Court has established that the seizable profit, pursuant to Article 644, sixth paragraph, of the penal code, coincides with the usurious interests actually paid. This means that the actual wealth obtained through illegal conduct is directly linked to the usurious interests received by the defendant. The judgment clarifies that, for the purposes of seizure, the potential non-return of the amounts lent as capital is irrelevant.
Seizable profit - Identification - Criteria - Usurious interests actually paid - Non-return of the amounts lent as capital - Irrelevance. In terms of usury, the seizable profit pursuant to Article 644, sixth paragraph, of the penal code, identifying itself, in accordance with the general notion of profit from the crime, with the actual wealth obtained, in a relationship of immediate and direct causal derivation from the illegal conduct, coincides with the usurious interests actually paid. (In this case, the Court, applying this principle, has deemed, based on the distinction between civil damage and criminal damage, that it was possible to subject to preventive seizure aimed at confiscation the amounts actually received by the defendant as interest, remaining irrelevant for this purpose the aspect of the non-return of the amounts lent as capital).
Legal Implications of the Judgment
This judgment has several legal implications, not only for cases of usury but also for the management of profits derived from illegal activities. In particular, the Court highlighted the distinction between civil damage and criminal damage, establishing that confiscation can also apply independently of the return of the amounts lent as capital. This represents a clear change compared to some previous interpretations, where return was seen as a fundamental element.
- The seizable profit is directly linked to usurious interests.
- Confiscation can occur even without the return of the amounts as capital.
- The Court reaffirms the importance of the distinction between civil damage and criminal damage.
Conclusions
In conclusion, judgment No. 16045 of 2023 provides an important clarification on the seizure of profits derived from usury, reaffirming the centrality of usurious interests in the assessment of seizable profit. This jurisprudential orientation could have a significant impact on the fight against usury, making the possibility of recovering illicit profits more effective and, consequently, protecting vulnerable individuals from predatory practices.
