Corporate Criminal Liability: Commentary on Judgment No. 31665 of 2024

Judgment No. 31665 of June 25, 2024, filed on August 2, 2024, by the Court of Cassation, represents a significant intervention on the criminal liability of legal entities, particularly concerning the economic advantage requirement. In this article, we will analyze the meaning of this ruling, the legal principles that underpin it, and the practical implications for companies.

Context of the Judgment

The case involved a company charged with manslaughter, in relation to alleged workplace accidents. The Court of Appeal of Rome had convicted the entity, but the Court of Cassation quashed this decision without referral, highlighting a crucial element: the insignificance of the cost savings derived from the omission of necessary precautions. This aspect led to the conclusion that the objective requirement of advantage, as established by Article 5 of Legislative Decree of June 8, 2001, No. 231, was not met.

Reference Maxim

Corporate Criminal Liability - Insignificance of Cost Savings - Relevance for Exclusion of Advantage Requirement - Exclusion - Case Law. In matters of corporate criminal liability, the insignificance of cost savings derived from the omission of due precautions is relevant for excluding the existence of the objective advantage requirement under Article 5 of Legislative Decree of June 8, 2001, No. 231, provided that the violation occurs within a context of general compliance with occupational safety regulations by the company. (Case concerning manslaughter, in which the Court quashed the entity's conviction without referral, noting the absence of an advantage in terms of cost savings relative to the company's size, also in light of the adoption of an organizational and management model suitable for preventing the alleged violation).

Implications for Companies

The judgment has important consequences for businesses, as it emphasizes that not every violation of safety regulations automatically entails corporate liability. For liability to be established, it must be demonstrated that the entity derived a significant economic advantage from the omission of precautions. If the advantage is negligible or non-existent, as in the case at hand, liability may be excluded.

• Companies must adopt adequate organizational models to prevent violations of safety regulations.
• The insignificance of cost savings can be an important defensive element in case of disputes.
• Compliance with occupational safety regulations is fundamental to demonstrating the absence of liability.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 31665 of 2024 offers an important reflection on corporate criminal liability, emphasizing the economic advantage requirement. Companies are called upon to ensure careful and compliant management, not only to avoid sanctions but also to protect their image and their employees. The adoption of effective organizational models therefore represents a fundamental step towards prevention and social responsibility.