Warning: Undefined array key "HTTP_ACCEPT_LANGUAGE" in /home/stud330394/public_html/template/header.php on line 25

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/stud330394/public_html/template/header.php:25) in /home/stud330394/public_html/template/header.php on line 61
Workplace Injuries and Criminal Liability: Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Cassation, Criminal Section IV, No. 43717/2024 | Bianucci Law Firm

Workplace Accidents and Criminal Liability: Commentary on Judgment Cass. pen., Section IV, No. 43717/2024

Judgment No. 43717 of November 29, 2024, by the Court of Cassation offers crucial insights into criminal liability in cases of workplace accidents. In particular, it examines the responsibility of various parties, including employers and workers, in relation to a tragic incident that occurred on a construction site. The Court highlighted violations of safety regulations and the supervisory obligations incumbent upon each involved party, offering a perspective that goes beyond the mere ascertainment of fault.

The Case Under Review

In the case at hand, the fatal accident of M.M. was attributed to a series of breaches by the parties involved. F.F., the crane operator, and K.K., the owner of the contracting company, were held responsible for failing to ensure the necessary safety conditions on the construction site. G.G., the safety coordinator, was found civilly liable for deficiencies in the safety plan, while H.H., the client commissioning the works, was excluded from any liability.

Criminal liability in cases of workplace accidents cannot be considered in isolation but must take into account the culpable cooperation of the various parties involved.

Responsibilities and Violations of Safety Regulations

The Court highlighted that F.F. operated the crane without possessing the necessary skills and without verifying that no other workers were present in the maneuvering area. This constitutes a direct violation of Article 20, paragraph 2, letter g), of Legislative Decree 81/2008. Similarly, G.G. was found guilty of having drafted an incomplete safety plan, failing to comply with the obligations set forth by the regulations.

  • F.F. did not check for the presence of workers in the maneuvering area.
  • G.G. did not prepare an adequate work schedule.
  • H.H. did not supervise the actions of the safety coordinator.

Conclusions and Implications of the Judgment

The Cassation judgment underscores the importance of correctly applying safety regulations on construction sites and the need for adequate training for workers. It also highlights the crucial role of the client in selecting the contractor and supervising work activities. Ultimately, liability in cases of workplace accidents is never attributable to a single party but must be assessed within the context of the actions of all protagonists involved.

Bianucci Law Firm