Analysis of Judgment No. 39481 of 2024: Intermediate Nullity and Notifications in Preliminary Hearings

The recent judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 39481 of July 2, 2024, filed on October 28, 2024, offers an important reflection on the issue of notifications in criminal proceedings. In particular, it focuses on the nullity arising from the failure to notify the defendant of the indictment request, a crucial aspect that can significantly affect the proper conduct of the proceedings.

Regulatory Context and Facts of the Case

The central issue addressed by the Court concerns the violation of the provisions set forth in art. 419 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which establishes the procedures for setting and notifying the preliminary hearing. The Court emphasized that the failure to notify the indictment request does not merely constitute a special nullity but an infringement of the necessary content of the notice, leading to an intermediate nullity.

The case involved the defendant L. P.M. Giordano Luigi, and the Court of Appeal of Milan had already rejected previous requests, highlighting the need to ensure each defendant's right to be informed and to actively participate in the proceedings. The decision underscores the importance of respecting procedural rights so that the defendant can adequately defend themselves.

The Ruling's Headnote

Violation of the provisions concerning the notice of the preliminary hearing and its notification pursuant to art. 419, paragraphs 1 and 4, of the Code of Criminal Procedure - Special Nullity - Existence - Failure to notify the defendant of the indictment request - Intermediate Nullity - Existence - Reasons. The nullity arising from the failure to notify the defendant of the indictment request, unlike the special nullity related to the violation of the provisions concerning the notice of the preliminary hearing and its notification pursuant to art. 419, paragraphs 1 and 4, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, constitutes an infringement of the necessary content of the notice, thus qualifying as an intermediate nullity under art. 178, paragraph 1, letter c), of the Code of Criminal Procedure, concerning the defendant's appearance, the regime of which is governed by art. 180 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Practical Implications and Conclusions

This judgment is of fundamental importance for Italian jurisprudence, as it clarifies the consequences of omitted notifications and strengthens the principle of a fair trial, enshrined in art. 111 of the Italian Constitution and art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The decision highlights how transparency and procedural correctness are essential to ensure the defense of defendants.

In summary, the Court has reaffirmed that the correctness of notifications and procedures is crucial for the validity of criminal proceedings. Any violation in this area can lead to significant legal consequences, making the judgment a guiding reference for future legal disputes.