Administrative Sanctions in Financial Intermediation: Commentary on Ordinance No. 21500 of 2024

The issue of administrative sanctions in the financial intermediation sector is of fundamental importance, especially in light of recent case law. Ordinance No. 21500 of July 31, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers significant clarifications regarding the terms of notification in cases of ongoing infringements, establishing an interpretative line that deserves in-depth analysis.

Regulatory Framework and Administrative Sanctions

The reference legislation for administrative sanctions in financial intermediation is contained in Legislative Decree No. 58 of 1998, known as the Consolidated Law on Finance. In particular, Article 195 provides for a period of one hundred and eighty days for the notification of charges. However, the central issue is how and when this period begins to run, especially in cases of ongoing infringements.

The Ruling's Principle

In general. Regarding administrative sanctions provided for the violation of the rules governing financial intermediation activities, in the case of an ongoing infringement, the period of one hundred and eighty days for the notification of charges in the procedure outlined by art. 195 Legislative Decree no. 58 of 1998 runs from the date of cessation of the ongoing infringement or, when there is no proof of such cessation, from the date of the ascertainment of the infringement relating to the specifically contested conduct.

This principle clarifies that, in the presence of an ongoing infringement, the period for notification does not begin to run until the infringement itself ceases. If there is no proof of such cessation, then the date on which the infringement was ascertained is used. This approach prevents the deadline for notifying sanctions from being arbitrarily accelerated, ensuring greater protection for operators in the sector.

Practical Implications

The implications of this ruling are manifold and can be summarised in the following points:

• Clarity on notification terms: The Court establishes a clear timeline that allows operators to better understand their rights and obligations.
• Protection of operators: The ruling protects operators from excessive sanctions in situations of ongoing infringements.
• Importance of proof: The need to provide proof of the cessation of the infringement becomes crucial for the defence of operators.

It is essential that professionals in the sector are aware of these provisions to avoid unexpected sanctions and to better manage proceedings against them.

Conclusions

Ordinance No. 21500 of 2024 represents an important step forward in regulatory clarity regarding administrative sanctions in the field of financial intermediation. The distinction between ongoing and non-ongoing infringements and the clarification on notification terms are elements that can significantly influence the legal strategies and operational practices of operators in the sector. It is essential to continue monitoring jurisprudential developments to ensure the correct interpretation and application of the rules.