Cass. pen., Sez. VI, Sent., n. 35031/2024: Embezzlement and Offensiveness of Conduct

The recent ruling of the Court of Cassation, no. 35031 of 18 September 2024, offers crucial insights into the definition of the crime of embezzlement, particularly regarding the need to assess the offensiveness of the defendant's conduct. In this case, the Court overturned the conviction of A.A., a nurse accused of embezzlement, finding that the value of the stolen goods was so negligible as not to warrant the application of criminal law.

The case of A.A. and the assessment of conduct

A.A. had been convicted in the first instance for stealing medicines and medical supplies from the hospital where she worked. However, the Court of Appeal of Catania had re-determined the sentence, while confirming her responsibility. The Court of Cassation, examining the case, emphasised that the conduct could not be considered offensive, given the negligible value of the appropriated goods, amounting to only 13.50 euros.

The Court excluded the possibility of defining the crime of embezzlement when the act of appropriation concerns goods lacking economically appreciable value.

Legal principles and case law

The decision of the Court of Cassation is based on established legal principles, which stipulate that a crime must be characterised by offensive conduct. In this case, the judges referred to the principle of offensiveness, according to which the crime of embezzlement does not exist if concrete damage to the public entity cannot be proven. This aligns with previous case law, which has excluded punishability for conduct that does not significantly harm the public interest.

• Principle of offensiveness: A crime must cause concrete damage.
• Negligible value of goods: The Court of Cassation highlighted that goods of low value do not justify a conviction.
• In dubio pro reo: The lack of concrete evidence against the defendant led to acquittal.

Conclusions

Ruling no. 35031/2024 represents an important step in defining the limits of the application of the crime of embezzlement. The Court of Cassation reiterated that the element of offensiveness is fundamental for the definition of this crime, excluding punishability in cases of negligible value of the stolen goods. This jurisprudential trend could have significant repercussions in future cases, reaffirming the importance of a careful and rigorous assessment of concrete circumstances in the handling of crimes involving public administration assets.