Commentary on Judgment No. 21807 of 2024: Jurisdiction Referral and Inadmissibility

The judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 21807 of 2024 addresses a crucial issue in civil procedural law, namely the referral of jurisdiction. In particular, the order clarifies the terms and methods for raising the issue of lack of jurisdiction by the judge, establishing precise rules to ensure the reasonable duration of the proceedings.

The Regulatory Framework

According to Article 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure (c.p.c.), the referral of jurisdiction must be raised by the judge by the first hearing for examination. This rule is part of the broader context of the need to ensure efficient management of disputes and to respond to the principle of the reasonable duration of proceedings, as enshrined in Article 111 of the Italian Constitution.

DEADLINES FOR RAISING LACK OF JURISDICTION - FIRST HEARING FOR EXAMINATION - HEARING FOR MERE POSTPONEMENT - POSSIBILITY OF RAISING THE CONFLICT AT THE HEARING FOR ACTUAL EXAMINATION - EXCLUSION - REASONS - VIOLATION OF THE DEADLINE - CONSEQUENCES - INADMISSIBILITY - SPECIFIC FACTS. Pursuant to Article 38 of the c.p.c., a referral of jurisdiction initiated by the judge seized of the dispute following the dismissal of the case by the previously seized judge is timely if it is filed by the first hearing for examination, possibly even following a reservation made at that hearing; failure to comply with this deadline results in the inadmissibility of the referral ex officio, even when it is raised at the hearing for examination subsequent to another hearing for mere postponement, the holding of which is prohibited by law in view of the constitutionally recognized aim of the reasonable duration of proceedings. (In application of this principle, the S.C. deemed the referral of jurisdiction raised at the first hearing for actual examination, subsequent to another held following a postponement ordered "for the same tasks," to be late).

Implications of the Judgment

The Court declared the referral of jurisdiction inadmissible when raised at an inadequate procedural stage, emphasizing the importance of strictly adhering to the deadlines set by law. This principle not only ensures a fair trial but also avoids unjustified delays, benefiting all parties involved.

• The referral of jurisdiction must be raised by the first hearing for examination.
• Failure to comply with this deadline results in the inadmissibility of the issue.
• Hearings for mere postponement cannot be used as a loophole to raise the jurisdictional conflict at a later stage.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 21807 of 2024 represents an important confirmation of the need to scrupulously adhere to the procedural deadlines provided for by the Code of Civil Procedure. Legal practitioners must pay attention to these deadlines to avoid unfavorable consequences, such as the inadmissibility of the referral of jurisdiction. The clarity of the regulatory provisions, combined with a rigorous interpretation by the Court, is essential to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the Italian judicial system.