The recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Cassation (No. 26263 of July 4, 2024) has reignited the debate on the necessary requirements for the commission of the crime of family abuse, particularly concerning the essential cohabitation between the perpetrator and the victim. The decision, which overturned the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Venice, focuses on the importance of proving cohabitation for the integration of the crime under Article 572 of the Criminal Code.
In the judgment under review, A.A. had been convicted of abuse against his cohabitant, but the appeal questioned the actual existence of a cohabiting relationship. The Court of Appeal had considered shared parenthood sufficient to constitute the crime, without adequately delving into the issue of cohabitation. However, the Supreme Court noted that the lack of a shared life project and the geographical distance between the two were relevant elements for establishing the criminal act.
The Court emphasized that the concept of "cohabitation" presupposes a stable and lasting emotional relationship, not limited to sporadic contact.
This ruling has significant implications both legally and socially. Indeed, the principle establishing the necessity of actual cohabitation to constitute the crime of family abuse is fundamental to preventing abuses of criminal law. Jurisprudence, as highlighted by the Supreme Court, must adhere to restrictive criteria, avoiding overly broad interpretations that could lead to conflicts between parties.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court's ruling represents a significant step towards a clearer definition of the requirements necessary for the commission of the crime of family abuse. The need to establish actual cohabitation between the perpetrator and the victim is a crucial element that helps ensure fair and proportionate justice. Jurisprudence must continue to evolve to adequately address the complexities of modern family relationships, protecting both victims of abuse and the rights of the accused.