Commentary on Judgment No. 38513 of 2024: Joinder of Civil Action and Court Costs

Judgment No. 38513 of September 19, 2024, represents an important benchmark in Italian criminal law, particularly concerning plea bargaining and the joinder of civil action. In it, the Court addressed the issue of the admissibility of joining a civil action at the hearing set pursuant to Art. 458-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure, highlighting the consequences related to the costs of joinder.

The Regulatory Context

The central issue concerned the legitimacy of the order to pay the costs incurred by the civil party following the defendant's request for a plea agreement. In particular, the Court established that it is possible to join a civil action even during the plea bargaining phase, marking a significant evolution from previous judicial interpretations.

Hearing set pursuant to Art. 458-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure for a plea agreement request following an immediate judgment decree - Joinder of civil action - Admissibility - Consequences - Taxation of joinder costs - Legitimacy - Case law. In the context of plea bargaining, the joinder of a civil action is admissible at the hearing set, pursuant to Art. 458-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure, following the plea agreement request submitted by the defendant after the issuance of the immediate judgment decree. Therefore, the order for the aforementioned defendant to pay the costs incurred by the civil party, issued with the judgment pursuant to Art. 444 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is legitimate. (Case in which the Court annulled the decision ordering the payment of court costs limited to the amount awarded to the civil party for the discussion phase, as this item relates to a decision phase not provided for in plea bargaining).

Consequences of the Judgment

The Court's decision has several practical implications:

• Admissibility of Joinder of Civil Action: The Court affirmed that the civil party can join even at the time of the plea agreement request, expanding the possibilities for protecting compensation rights.
• Court Costs: The order to pay the costs incurred by the civil party is legitimate, but not for all amounts, as the discussion phase is not provided for in plea bargaining.
• Regulatory Clarity: The judgment contributes to clarifying an aspect that, until now, has generated differing interpretations among various courts.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Judgment No. 38513 of 2024 represents a step forward towards greater clarity and consistency in Italian criminal law. Its importance lies not only in defining the possibility of joining a civil action during the plea bargaining phase but also in regulating court costs. This judicial orientation offers an important opportunity for victims of crimes to assert their rights and obtain compensation, making the legal system fairer and more accessible.