Order No. 16446 of 2024: The Substantive Nature of Extinction Orders on Appeal

In the Italian legal landscape, judgment No. 16446 of June 13, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, stands out for its relevance concerning extinction orders in appeal proceedings. The Court clarified that an extinction order, issued in the form of an ordinance, must be considered a substantive judgment and therefore must be signed by the president and the reporting judge. This decision leads to important reflections on the validity of judicial orders and their correct implementation.

The Substantive Nature of the Extinction Judgment

The order issued by the Court of Cassation clarifies that the extinction of a proceeding is not a mere closure act but possesses a substantive nature. This means that the ordinance declaring the extinction of the proceeding implies a decision that has relevant legal effects, comparable to those of a judgment. This aspect is crucial for ensuring legal certainty and respect for procedural guarantees.

The Necessity of Signature

Appeal judgment - Extinction order - Substantive nature of a judgment - Signature of the president and the reporting judge - Necessity. The order, issued in the form of an ordinance, by which the collegiate appellate judge declares the extinction of the proceeding, has the substantive nature of a judgment and is therefore necessary, for its validity, that it be signed by the president and the reporting judge, unless the president is also the reporting judge and the author of the order.

The Court emphasized that the signature of the president and the reporting judge is a necessary condition for the validity of the order. This aspect is in line with Article 132 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which establishes the formal requirements for judgments. Failure to comply with this formality could lead to the invalidity of the order itself, creating legal uncertainties and potential disputes.

Practical Implications of the Judgment

• Strengthening legal certainty, ensuring that every extinction order complies with the required formalities.
• The possibility for parties to challenge the validity of an unsigned order, expanding procedural protections.
• Clarification of the roles of the president and the reporting judge in the extinction phase of the proceeding.

In conclusion, Order No. 16446 of 2024 represents an important step forward in defining the procedural rules concerning extinction orders in appeal proceedings. It not only clarifies the substantive nature of such acts but also establishes the necessity of signature, thereby protecting the rights of the parties involved.

Conclusions

The consequences of this judgment extend beyond the individual case, influencing judicial practice and future legal strategies. It is essential for legal professionals to pay attention to these provisions to ensure a fair and transparent legal process.