COURT OF CASSATION (2014): “CALLING ONE’S MOTHER-IN-LAW A SNAKE IS NOT AN INSULT”

June 2016

Reading or hearing reports about a ruling of the Court of Cassation immediately piques our interest and we tend to try and understand what has been decided.Although Italy has produced internationally-renowned jurists, and practically every Italian has a relative, friend or acquaintance who is a lawyer, our interest in the rulings of the Supreme Court cannot be easily attributed to a love of regulations or procedures.More prosaically, the rulings of the Court hit the national headlines when they are particularly wacky and unusual, or when public opinion think that the decisions are completely ridiculous: let’s review a few of them!

A COUNTRY OF LAWYERS. OR BUSYBODIES?

CHASTITY JEANS

In its own way, judgement n. 1636/1999 about sexual assault was historic. The Supreme Court quashed a judgement condemning a driving instructor to two years and ten months for having raped a client during a driving lesson. The girl had just turned eighteen.According to the Court of Cassation the act was “consensual”. The rationale? She was wearing a tight-fitting pair of jeans which, the judges wrote, “everyone knows” is a piece of clothing “that cannot be removed, even partially, without the active collaboration of the person wearing them”. In short, the girl must have consented. The media picked up on the ruling and splashed it across the news; it was bitterly criticised by politicians, associations and the public. Luckily, a subsequent ruling by the Court of Cassation about a similar case declared that jeans cannot be “compared to a sort of chastity belt”, and reinstated the conviction for sexual assault. All that is needed is common sense; better late than never.

Another rather questionable ruling about corruption by the Court of Cassation came in 2012. The Supreme Court basically maintained that it was legal for a Mayor to ask a Director General of a Local Health Unit to intercede and transfer a female doctor.That is what the Cassation judges decided despite the fact that, after the female doctor was transferred, the Mayor gave a laptop to the Director General.The rationale? The Mayor had acted “spontaneously as a sign of appreciation and acknowledgement of the willingness shown”; it could not be considered a crime because a Mayor has no direct authority over the Local Health Unit. Of course, the judges could have considered the influence/power wielded by local politicians!

HEY DOC, DON’T FORGET!

Do you remember “playing truant” at school, when you were meant to do a test or be questioned in mathematics and suddenly you were running a temperature or had to attend the funeral of an uncle you’d never met? Well, the judges sitting in their offices decided you’re an adult now and can’t do these things anymore!In fact, judgement 18678/2014 by the Cassation rejected the appeal by an employee fired due to too many “patchy” absences: too many sick days before and after weekends and festivities or after days off. The Court believed that this kind of behaviour by the employee stopped him from providing an “adequate performance that could be profitably used by the company”.The ensuing controversy focused on the following issue: the employee had been laid off even if he had not exceeded the maximum number of sick days allowed. Evidence by his colleagues tipped the scales in favour of the company.

PLAYING TRUANT? IT ONLY WORKS AT SCHOOL!

SPEED TRAPS ARE OK, BUT THEY MUST BE VISIBLE!

The Court’s rationale was clear: speed traps are deter-rents to induce virtuous be-haviour by drivers and not devices to turn a quick profit. Municipalities have been warned!

The ruling n. 22158/2013 by the Court of Cassation thrilled thousands of drivers: the decision of the Court involved the legitimate position of speed traps.The judges confirmed the conviction of a company for fraud because it had supplied and positioned several speed straps in cars where drivers could not see them (e.g., inside “unmarked vehi-cles” or in personal computers).

WHERE ARE YOU OFF TO, OH EMPLOYEE ON A BICYCLE?

Bicycles, invented roughly 200 years ago, seem to be the future means of transportation: ecological and quiet, they can be used to move easily around in the city and exercise at the same time. It’s a pity, though, that according to the Court of Cassation if you have an accident while pedalling to work on your bicycle you’re not entitled to any sort of compensation.In 2012, the Court of Cassation ruling n. 7970 established that if an employee can use public transportation on the home-to-work route then he/she should take advantage of it because, the judges decided, it is more comfortable and is less inconvenient for the employee.In short, it’s almost obligatory to use public transport when it is available. Of course, a few doubts still remain about the Court’s concept of comfort and inconvenience, especially in big cities.

FACEBOOK, THE COUNTRY’S AGORA

In a society that increasingly spends time on social net-works and considers more and more important what happens in this parallel world, the Court of Cassa-tion was asked to express an opinion about the insults and slurs posted on Facebook.The Court established that (ruling n. 37596/2014) the crime of annoyance or harassment of individuals can be deemed to have been

perpetrated only if the platform invented by Mark Zuckerberg is to be considered as a public place open to the public.In its far-sighted ruling the Court established that everyone agrees that Facebook “represents a sort of immaterial agora, with unlimited access and visions, made possible by a scientific progress that the Legislator could never had imagined”. Dear haters, you have been warned too!

AH, WHAT A GOOD CUP OF COFFEE!

“clearly insignificant” sum of money involved.Actually, it is not even a violation. In fact, as the driver was handing over the money to the policemen he said: “drop the matter and go have a coffee”. All told, the driver only wanted to be nice!

Even children know that offering money to a cop is a surefire way of getting booked for corruption of a public officer. Unless, in the opinion of the Court of Cassation (ruling n. 7505/2013) you’re trying to corrupt two cops with a few pennies.The case involved a driver who was stopped by the police and thought it was a good idea to put 10 euro inside the car licence he was handing over to them, to avoid a fine. The Court decided that, at most, this can be considered a violation given the

IF THEY ARE SEEDS, THEY WILL GROW!

Despite the efforts of a group of MPs who created a Parliamentary Intergroup for the liberalisation, sale and consumption of cannabis, in Italy selling and consuming cannabis is still an act punishable by law.The same cannot be said for cannabis seeds, at least if you want to go by the ruling of the Cassation n. 47604/2012 according to which “merely selling cannabis seeds from which drugs can be made is not criminally relevant, and is considered as a non-punishable preparatory act”.In fact, the judges decided that it is impossible to infer the “effective destination of the seeds”. It remains to be seen what can be done with the seeds, apart from planting them.

COME ON, THERE’S STILL SPACE!

Ruling n. 15936/2013 is rather unusual, although in this case the Court of Cassation was powerless to do anything but acknowledge a legislative void. Nevertheless, the outcome partially legitimised one of the oldest professions in Italy: the illegal car park attendant!The decision involved a resident immigrant who had been cautioned by the Commissioner of Salerno to stop this activity. The car park attendant, prompted by an admirable sense of professional duty, had ignored the Commissioner’s warning and continued to do his job.In fact, according to the Italian legal system, being an illegal car park attendant is not a criminal offence but only a simple administrative offence punishable in accordance with the Highway Code.

We would be amiss if in this review we didn’t include a debate involving housewives. So, on this issue we will go to Brescia and focus on bleach, rinsing and spin drying.After a legal dispute lasting roughly ten years, the Cassation ruled on the thorny issue of “dripping servitude”. Despite its highfalutin name, all it involves is the right to let one’s washing drip down onto the apartment below.

DIRTY LAUNDRY IS... SPUN AT HOME!

The judges agreed (ruling n. 14547/2012) that two simple wires held tight by metal brackets are not enough to be able to exercise this right. In fact they established that before hanging out the washing the person has to make sure it is spun properly.

DEAR, LET’S CUT IT!

Let’s be honest: how many times have women come out of the hairdressers and thought “he’s ruined me!”. The solution is quite simple: change hairdressers!But if it’s a jealous husband who cuts his wife’s hair because he’s just found out she’s having an affair, the ending can be quite different. The unfaithful wife “shaven” by the husband cited her husband for aggravated private violence.The Court of Cassation (ruling n. 10413/2013) found in favour of the wife and confirmed the husband’s conviction for having behaved in such a manner as to have restricted the woman’s moral freedom.

Telos Analisi & Strategie Palazzo Doria PamphiljVia del Plebiscito 107Roma 00186

T. +39 06 69940838telos@telosaes.itwww.telosaes.it

facebook.com/Telosaes

twitter.com/Telosaes

youtube.com/telosaes

https://plus.google.com/110655654803516890208

pinterest.com/telosaes/

linkedin.com/company/telos-a&s

slideshare.net/telosaes

this.cm/telos