Press review  

This issue is assuming greater relevance. Recently there have been some plea bargaining sentences (so conviction) against some companies for offences foreseen by the new rules.
The main judgments on company’s administrative liability are:

• 20th March 2007 – sentence – Supreme Court VI criminal section (principle of legality – entity’s administrative liability foreseen by the Law come into force before the offence’s perpetrating)
• 12th March 2007 – sentence – Supreme Court II criminal section (default on the  expiration time referred to the decision of the Court of Appeal in connection with precautionary measures -  unenforceability as precautionary measure for the disqualification sanction not foreseen for this kind of offence)
• 12th January 2007 – sentence – Court of Turin I criminal section (crossing out from the corporate list and termination of the company before the criminal and administrative action – lack of proceedings cause the offence could not have been challenged)
• 10th January 2007 - sentence – Supreme Court II section criminal (profits on criminal acts –precautionary attachment per equivalent – connection of the fact to a certain hypothesis  of offence– comparison between the attachable goods and the forfeitable ones – public funds allocation obtained by devices or frauds –  fraud offence commission at the moment of the actual sums receipt –prolonged perpetration fraud – per equivalent attachment and forfeiture inapplicability referring to sums obtained before the 231/2001 Decree enforcement – company’s assignee’s  obligation only  referred to the pecuniary sanction payment, without forfeiture – shares’ precautionary attachment)
• 11th  December 2006 - sentence – Court of Milan IV section criminal (interest or profit – cases of pecuniary sanction’s reduction – compensation for damages – choice of a suitable organizational model– requirements for disqualification sanctions – idea of profit– evaluation of the profit’s value– unlawful conducts’ reiteration– criteria to setting out worth and number of shares –forfeiture of the profit’s equivalent value–offence’s profit quantification)
• 2nd October 2006 – sentence – Supreme Court (disqualification precautionary measure repeal and companies’ interest to contest – precautionary needs – concrete danger of similar offences perpetration – offence’s mode and circumstance – corporate status – state assessment about the entity’s organization);
• 2nd October 2006 – sentence – Supreme Court (disqulaification precautionary measure repeal and companies’ interest to contest – omitted indication of the company legal representative’s name – prognostic assessment about the future disqualification sanction application – big profit notion – financial profit, not necessary immediate, achieved from the offence realization – precautionary ordinance’s explanation per relationem to the individual’s precautionary ordinance –independent individuation of the entity’s heavy evidences – relationship between entity and the offence perpetrator – entity’s interest or profit – offence perpetrator or third’s sole interest);
• 27th September 2006 – ordinance – Supreme Court II section criminal (offence’s profit forfeiture per equivalent – sanction nature and solidarity principle – people extraneous to the offence – forfeiture against the entity nature);
• 25th July 2006 – sentence – Court of Milan – judge for the preliminary investigations Dr Varanelli (compensation for damages, and harmful and dangerous offence’s consequences removal – offence’s profit forfeiture – forfeiture nature in connection with the entity – sentence publication );
• 13th July 2006 – decision – Council of State during judgment V section ( judicial commissioner ‘s powers – judge’s authorization in order to acts of extraordinary administration – continuation of the entity’s activity by the judicial commissioner – public race attendance);
• 4th April 2006 – ordinance – Court of Turin Judge for preliminary investigations Dr Noce (association - fraud prepared against public entities – precautionary disqualification measure in order to deal with the public administration);
• 22nd March 2006 - sentence - Supreme Court>  criminal II section (seizure – forfeiture);
• 30th January 2006- sentence - Supreme Court criminal II section (assumed offence perpetration – legislative decree 231/2001’s enforcement – entity’s profit) evaluation of fraud to the State detriment referred to illegal reception of funds allocated in recurrent accruals, as a prolonged perpetration offence. Imposition to the entity of ban sanctions according to art. 13 of Legislative Decree no. 231/2001, as the profit obtained from the entity is achieved by the crediting of allocated sums;
• 6th January 2006 – ordinance – Court of Turin - judge for the preliminary investigations Dr.Salvadori (plaintiff’s appearance against the entity before a court - admissibility);
• 11th October 2005 - sentence – Court of Turin-judge for the preliminary hearing Dr. Dezani (effective administrator)
• 11th October 2005- sentence – Court of Turin - judge for the preliminary hearing Dr.Dezani (penalty’s enforcement admissibility on request – mitigation of penalty);
• 7th July 2005 - ordinance - Court of Turin Section competent on precautionary measure’s impugnment (
• 20th June 2005 – sentence – Supreme Court – (precautionary forfeiture – procedure);
• 6th May 2005 – ordinance -  Court of Ivrea - judge for the preliminary investigations Dr. Tornatore (revocations of contributions - precautionary measure - serious criminal circumstances - same crime perpetration risk );
• 18th April 2005 – ordinance – Court of Bari - judge for the preliminary investigations Dr. De Benedectis (judicial officer – conditions for enforcement of precautionary measure – organizational models);
• 10th February 2005 – ordinance - Court of Turin –judge for preliminary hearing (modification of the notifice);
• 11th January 2005 – advice - Council of State section III- (precautionary disqualification measures - effects referred to subsidiary or holding companies - effects referred to the temporary incorporated companies, European financial interest groups and permanent companies’ pools – enforcing of service agreements – ban from dealing with the Civil Service - concept);
• 10th January 2005 – ordinance – Court of Milan – judge for preliminary hearing Dr. Tacconi (plaintiff appearance before the court);
• 20th December 2004 – ordinance – Court of Milan precautionary measure’s competent Section (juridical officer –precautionary disqualification measure enforcement conditions – serious criminal evidence - the same offence perpetration risk - organizational models – holdings – entity’s interest or profit – measures’ choice criteria – proportion and suitability);
• 11th December 2004 – ordinance – Court of Turin – judge for preliminary hearing Dr. Perelli (preliminary hearing – sources of evidence omitted in the application of the committal for a trial);
• 27th November 2004 – ordinance – Court of Turin - Judge for preliminary investigations Dr.  Perelli (plaintiff appearance before a court);
• 28th October 2004 – ordinance – Court of Milan Section competent on precautionary measure’s impugnment (precautionary measure disallowing negotiations with the public administration – appropriate organizational model – circumstances following the offence committal– Italian Judicial Authority jurisdiction – risk of committing the same offence – requirements  provided for application of disqualification sanctions - cessation of precautionary measures);
• 26 October 2004 – sentence – Court of Lucca - Judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Dal Torrione (entity’s profit – forfeiture – fine reduction cases – reparation of the offence’s consequences);
• 5th October 2004 - ordinance; Court of Milan – judge for preliminary hearing Dr. Tacconi (proceedings separation);
• 27th September 2004 - ordinance; - Supreme Court criminal VI section (precautionary measures – immediate appeal at the Supreme Court)
• 20th September 2004 - ordinance - ; Court of Milan –judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Secchi (offence’s condition – entity’s profit – holdings – precautionary needs – organizational models – precautionary disqualification measures – judicial officer – suspension of precautionary measures);
• 23rd July 2004 – ordinance – Supreme Court II criminal section (precautionary measures -  means of impugnment);
• 11th June 2004 – ordinance – Court of Turin, judge for preliminary hearing Dr. Perelli (preliminary investigation – preliminary hearing);
• 5th May 2004 -  ordinance(supplement)- Court of Milan  Judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Salvini (criteria for the choice of disqualification sanctions);
• 30th April 2004 –sentence – Court of Milan ; judge for preliminary hearing Dr. Forleo (fine reduction cases);
• 27th April 2004 –ordinance - Court of Milan- Judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Salvini;
• 20th April 2004 - ordinance - Court of Vibo Valentia – judge for preliminary investigations (offence conditions– holdings  - holdings – precautionary needs– organizational models– precautionary measures – judicial officer -  precautionary measures’ interruption);
• 23rd March 2004 – ordinance – Court of Milan – judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Piffer (special procedeedings);
• 9th March 2004 – ordinance – Court of Milan - judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Forleo (institution appearance before the court against the entity– admissibility – exclusion);
• 28th January 2004 – ordinance – Court of Turin - judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Salvatori (precautionary measures – entity’s liability );
• 30th May 2003 – ordinance – Court of Rome - judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Patarnello (subjects);
• 4th April 2003 – ordinance – Court of Rome - judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Finiti (organizational models – repairing of the offences’ consequences – choice criteria of precautionary disqualification measures);
• 28th March 2003 –  ordinance – Court of Salerno - judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Belmonte (constitutional legitimacy of the articles 9 and 45 of the Legislative Decree 231/01 –precautionary disqualification measures – subjects);
• 7th March 2003 – sentence – Court of Rome - judge for preliminary hearings Dr. Finiti (administrative pecuniary sanction);
• 6th November 2002 -  ordinance – Court of Milan - judge for preliminary investigations Dr. Corte (precautionary disqualification measures);
• 4th November 2002– sentence – Court of Pordenone - judge for preliminary hearings Dr. Piccin (pecuniary sanction reduction cases).