Commentary on Order No. 19293 of 2024: Accelerated Decision in Inadmissible Appeals

Recently, the Court of Cassation issued Order No. 19293 of July 12, 2024, addressing the issue of the constitutional legitimacy of Article 380-bis, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure. This provision is fundamental for managing inadmissible, non-prosecutable, or manifestly unfounded appeals, as it allows for accelerated proceedings in chambers rather than in public hearings. The order is part of a broader context where the speed of proceedings and the protection of parties' rights are at the center of legal debate.

The Regulatory Framework and the Question of Legitimacy

Article 380-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure was introduced to streamline civil proceedings, enabling the Court to decide more quickly on appeals that lack valid legal grounds. However, some legal scholars have raised doubts about the compatibility of this provision with the principles of equity and justice, as established by Articles 24, 103, 111, 113, and 117 of the Italian Constitution, as well as Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

In particular, the appellants challenged that decisions made in chambers could limit the right to a fair and public trial. However, in its ruling, the Court deemed the issue to be manifestly unfounded.

“of Article 380-bis, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the part where it establishes that, in the procedure for the accelerated decision of inadmissible, non-prosecutable, or manifestly unfounded appeals, as a consequence of the request for a decision filed by the appellant, the Court proceeds in chambers, rather than in public hearing, because the chamber hearing satisfies the needs of speed and procedural economy, constitutes a procedural model capable of ensuring effective and equal confrontation between the parties (and is a not unreasonable expression of the discretion reserved to the legislator in shaping procedural institutions), guarantees the participation of the Attorney General (with the foreseen possibility of submitting written conclusions), and does not violate the collegial essence of appellate jurisdiction (as the proposal does not have a decisive character, nor does it anticipate a judgment by the rapporteur).”

Implications of the Ruling

This order represents an important confirmation of the validity of the accelerated procedure, highlighting how speed and procedural economy can coexist with the rights of the parties. The Court emphasized that chamber proceedings do not prejudice the right to adversarial proceedings, ensuring that all parties have the opportunity to express their positions, including through the participation of the Attorney General.

• Efficiency of the judicial system.
• Respect for the fundamental rights of the parties.
• Clarity and transparency in proceedings.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Order No. 19293 of 2024 reiterates the importance of speed in civil justice without compromising citizens' rights. The Court has demonstrated that it is possible to find a balance between procedural efficiency and respect for fundamental rights, a topic of growing relevance in the European legal landscape. The question of constitutional legitimacy raised by the appellants has therefore been clearly resolved, confirming the validity of Article 380-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure and paving the way for a more practical and faster application of civil justice in Italy.