Analysis of Judgment No. 37636 of 2023: Conflicts of Jurisdiction Between Courts

The recent judgment No. 37636 of April 7, 2023, filed on September 14, 2023, offers crucial insights into conflicts of jurisdiction between courts sitting as a single judge and those sitting as a panel. Issued by the Court of Cassation, this decision is part of a complex legal context where procedural dynamics can lead to situations of stalemate and confusion.

The Regulatory Framework

The judgment in question addresses a specific aspect of criminal procedure, highlighting how a conflict of jurisdiction between a court sitting as a single judge and one sitting as a panel is admissible. This occurs when two conflicting decisions create a procedural stalemate, attributable to one of the "analogous cases" provided for by Article 28, paragraph 2, of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

• Article 28, paragraph 2, Code of Criminal Procedure: provisions on conflicts of jurisdiction.
• Articles 33 bis and 33 ter: reference to conflicts of jurisdiction.
• Case Law: previous precedents confirming the established principle.

The Meaning of the Maxim

Conflict between a court sitting as a single judge and a court sitting as a panel - Negative conflict - Provisions on conflicts in "analogous" cases - Applicability. A conflict of jurisdiction between a court sitting as a single judge and a court sitting as a panel is admissible, as, even in this case, a procedural stalemate arises due to two conflicting decisions, attributable to one of the "analogous cases" referred to in Article 28, paragraph 2, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the resolution of which is vested in the Court of Cassation.

The maxim above clarifies that conflicts of jurisdiction between different court compositions can only be resolved by the Court of Cassation. This implies that in situations of conflicting decisions, justice cannot proceed due to the lack of a definitive ruling. The Court, therefore, becomes the competent body to settle such situations, preventing the parties involved from remaining in a state of uncertainty.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 37636 of 2023 represents an important clarification on conflicts of jurisdiction. It underscores the need for clear and defined management of conflicts between courts, highlighting the central role of the Court of Cassation in ensuring the continuity and certainty of criminal proceedings. Legal professionals must pay particular attention to these dynamics to avoid procedural issues that could compromise the successful outcome of proceedings.