The article analyzes sentence 12445/2025 of the Court of Cassation, which qualifies as "abnormal" the order by which the trial judge renews the notification of the summons decree to the injured party instead of returning the documents to the pre-trial hearing judge, in violation of art. 554-bis c.p.p. A clear guide to understanding implications and defense strategies.
The Supreme Court reiterates that the acquisition of documents by the lawyer of the offended person, without civil party constitution, does not vitiate the trial: only a mere irregularity, without nullity. Analysis of principles and practical implications for lawyers and legal operators.
The Court of Cassation, with ruling no. 16096/2025, reiterates that the failure to notify the defendant of the hearing postponement constitutes a general nullity of intermediate regime, curable if not timely objected to. Let's see what this means in practice for defence lawyers and defendants.