Commentary on Judgment No. 26263 of 2024: Shared Parenthood and Domestic Abuse

The recent Judgment No. 26263 of May 30, 2024, filed on July 4, 2024, offers an important reflection on the configuration of the crime of domestic abuse. In particular, the Court has established that the mere sharing of parenthood, in the absence of a marital relationship or cohabitation, is not sufficient to constitute a "family" relationship for the purposes of applying criminal provisions concerning abuse.

Regulatory and Jurisprudential Context

The Court referred to Article 572 of the Criminal Code, which governs domestic abuse offenses, emphasizing that mere shared parenthood, lacking significant interactions between the parties, cannot by itself constitute a prerequisite for the commission of the crime. This approach is based on the interpretation of Article 337-ter of the Civil Code, which establishes parents' obligations regarding the upbringing and maintenance of children, without, however, creating a reciprocal bond between the parents.

Absence of marriage and cohabitation - Common parenthood - Configuration of the crime - Sufficiency - Exclusion - Reasons. In the context of domestic abuse, mere shared parenthood, outside of a marital or cohabiting relationship and in the absence of significant contact between the perpetrator of the conduct and the victim, cannot, by itself, constitute the prerequisite for deeming a "family" relationship to exist that is relevant for the configuration of the crime. (In its reasoning, the Court clarified that the obligations of upbringing and maintenance of children incumbent upon parents under Article 337-ter of the Civil Code do not create a reciprocal relationship between the latter, as their common child is the sole interested party).

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment represents an important reference point for case law on family law and abuse. The principle established by the Court of Cassation clarifies that family ties cannot be considered superficially but require concrete interactions to be recognized for criminal purposes. The practical implications of this judgment are diverse:

• Strengthening the need for concrete evidence of abuse to configure the crime.
• Clarification of parents' rights and duties in the absence of a marital bond.
• Possible re-evaluation of unfounded accusations based solely on shared parenthood.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 26263 of 2024 offers a fundamental insight into family dynamics and their legal implications. The Court of Cassation, with its intervention, has clarified that shared parenthood is not sufficient to constitute a relationship of abuse, requiring a more in-depth analysis of the interactions between the parties involved. This approach could contribute to greater protection of the rights of both parents and minors, preventing abuses of the legal system in situations of family conflict.