Commentary on Judgment No. 19314 of 2023: Falsehood in Conformity Assessment

Judgment No. 19314 of January 19, 2023, represents an important ruling by the Court of Cassation regarding the liability of professional technicians in relation to conformity assessments for building works. In this case, the accused technician falsely certified the legality of works already carried out, constituting an offense provided for by art. 20, paragraph 13, of Presidential Decree No. 380 of 2001.

The Regulatory Framework

Presidential Decree No. 380 of 2001, known as the Consolidated Text on Construction, regulates the procedures for issuing building permits and establishes penalties for false certifications. In particular, Article 20, paragraph 13, punishes anyone who falsely certifies the legality of building works, even within the scope of regularization requests pursuant to art. 36. The Court clarified that the rule is not limited only to ordinary building permits but also applies to those issued for regularization, highlighting an ethical and legal disvalue associated with false certifications.

Offense under art. 30 Presidential Decree No. 380 of 2001 - Conformity assessment containing false certifications on the legality of works already executed - Configurability - Reasons. The conduct of the professional technician who, in the conformity assessment requested for the issuance of a building permit for regularization pursuant to art. 36 of the aforementioned Presidential Decree, falsely certifies the legality of works already carried out, constitutes the offense under art. 20, paragraph 13, Presidential Decree of June 6, 2001, No. 380. (In its reasoning, the Court clarified that the criminal provision, although included within the discipline of the procedure relating to the issuance of the building permit, also applies to that concerning the regularization permit, without this involving a violation of the prohibition of analogy "in malam partem," as the disvalue connected to the false certification is analogous).

Implications of the Judgment

This ruling has several implications for professionals in the construction sector. Firstly, it underscores the importance of providing truthful and documented certifications, as criminal liability can arise not only from fraudulent actions but also from simple negligence in providing correct information. Furthermore, the Court clarified that the provisions on regularization permits should not be interpreted restrictively, as the principles of legality and administrative correctness must always prevail.

• Strengthening of liability for professional technicians.
• Need for rigorous documentation in conformity certifications.
• Extended application of building permit regulations to regularization procedures.

Conclusion

Judgment No. 19314 of 2023 by the Court of Cassation highlights the importance of transparency and truthfulness in conformity certifications in the construction field. Professionals must pay particular attention to the information they provide, as violation of these rules not only entails criminal penalties but also undermines trust in the construction system. It is crucial for industry operators to understand the consequences of their actions and to scrupulously adhere to regulatory provisions to avoid incurring serious offenses.