Administrative Sanctions in Financial Intermediation: Commentary on Order No. 21500 of 2024

The issue of administrative sanctions in the financial intermediation sector is of paramount importance, especially in light of recent judicial pronouncements. Order No. 21500 of July 31, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers significant clarifications regarding the terms for contesting charges in cases of ongoing offenses, establishing an interpretative line that deserves further in-depth analysis.

Regulatory Framework and Administrative Sanctions

The reference legislation for administrative sanctions in financial intermediation is contained in Legislative Decree No. 58 of 1998, known as the Consolidated Law on Finance. In particular, Article 195 provides for a period of one hundred and eighty days for the contestation of charges. However, the central issue is how and when this period begins to run, especially in cases of ongoing offenses.

The Ruling's Principle

In general. Regarding administrative sanctions provided for the violation of rules governing financial intermediation activities, in cases of ongoing offenses, the one hundred and eighty-day period for contesting charges in the proceedings outlined by Article 195 of Legislative Decree No. 58 of 1998 runs from the date of cessation of the ongoing offense or, when there is no proof of such cessation, from the date of the ascertainment of the infringement concerning the specifically contested conduct.

This principle clarifies that, in the presence of an ongoing offense, the period for contesting charges does not begin to run until the offense itself ceases. If there is no proof of such cessation, then the date on which the infringement was ascertained is taken into account. This approach prevents the deadline for contesting sanctions from being arbitrarily accelerated, ensuring greater protection for operators in the sector.

Practical Implications

The implications of this ruling are manifold and can be summarized in the following points:

• Clarity on contestation terms: The Court establishes a clear timeline that allows operators to better understand their rights and obligations.
• Protection of operators: The ruling protects operators from excessive sanctions in situations of ongoing offenses.
• Importance of proof: The need to provide proof of the cessation of the offense becomes crucial for the defense of operators.

It is essential for professionals in the sector to be aware of these provisions to avoid unexpected sanctions and to better manage proceedings against them.

Conclusions

Order No. 21500 of 2024 represents a significant step forward in regulatory clarity regarding administrative sanctions in the field of financial intermediation. The distinction between ongoing and non-ongoing offenses and the clarification on contestation terms are elements that can significantly influence the legal strategies and operational practices of operators in the sector. It is essential to continue monitoring jurisprudential developments to ensure the correct interpretation and application of the rules.