Cassazione Penale - Sentenza n. 06075/2026

Key Facts

Issues

• The court examined the preventive seizure of profits from Made Petrol Italia S.r.l., where the applicant was the managing agent. The seizure was based on Articles 81 (second paragraph), 110 of the Penal Code, and Article 8 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000. The profit was quantified at €6,392,808.23, and if not found, movable and immovable assets up to that amount were to be seized.
• The court discussed the applicability of the 'bis in idem' principle in scenarios where the same individual is subject to multiple criminal proceedings for the same offense. It cited the ECHR's Grande Chambre decision of 10/02/2009 (Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia) to clarify that the prohibition against double jeopardy does not apply to concurrent proceedings in the context of legal litispendenza.

Holdings

• The court referenced Sez. U., n. 25932 del 29/05/2008 (Ivanov, Rv. 239692-01) and Sez. 4, n. 43480 del 30/09/2014 (Rv. 260314), stating that the motivation in the order confirming the seizure is merely apparent and thus subject to cassation for legal violation when arguments about the relevance or connection of seized assets to the crime lack specific case anchoring.
• The court cited the European Court of Human Rights (CEDU) in the Sergey Zolotukhin case (10/02/2009) to clarify that the 'bis in idem' prohibition does not apply to litispendenza when the same person faces multiple simultaneous criminal proceedings for the same fact.
• The court emphasized the importance of ensuring parties can participate in hearings and submit conclusions regarding the state of proceedings they have previously reviewed, particularly in the context of the camerale process.

Remedies

• In the absence of identifiable profits, the court authorized the seizure of movable and immovable assets owned by Made Petrol Italia S.r.l. or its representative, up to the equivalent value of the quantified profit (€6,392,808.23).
• The court ordered a preventive seizure of the profits from Made Petrol Italia S.r.l. (amounting to €6,392,808.23) for direct confiscation, or in the absence of the profits, seizure of movable and immovable assets up to that value held by the company.

Legal Principles

Precedent Name

Cited Statute

• Codice Penale
• Legislative Decree No. 74 of 2000

Judge Name

• Stefano Corbetta
• Luca Ramacchi
• Giuseppe Noviello
• Aldo Aceto
• Massimo Battistini

Passage Text

• o di assoluzione, il divieto di 'bis in idem' non si applica, per la giurisprudenza convenzionale, ai casi di litispendenza, quando cioè una medesima persona sia perseguita o sottoposta contemporaneamente a più procedimenti penali per il medesimo fatto (Corte EDU, Grande Chambre, 10/02/2009, caso Sergey Zolotukhin c. Russia, §§ 110-111).
• Sez. U., n. 25932 del 29/05/2008, Ivanov, Rv. 239692 - 01; nello stesso senso anche Sez. 4, n. 43480 del 30/09/2014, Rv. 260314, secondo cui la motivazione dell'ordinanza confermativa del decreto di sequestro probatorio è meramente apparente - quindi censurabile con il ricorso per cassazione per violazione di legge - quando le argomentazioni in ordine al 'fumus' del carattere di pertinenza ovvero di corpo del reato dei beni sottoposti a vincolo non risultano ancorate alle peculiarità del caso concreto.
• misure, il sequestro preventivo, finalizzato alla confisca diretta nei confronti della società Made Petrol Italia S.r.l, della quale la ricorrente era procuratrice e gestrice di fatto, del profitto del reato di cui agli artt. 81, secondo comma, 110 cod. pen., 8 d.lgs. n. 74 del 2000 o, in caso di mancato reperimento del profitto, di beni mobili ed immobili fino alla concorrenza del profitto (quantificato nella misura di euro 6.392.808,23) in disponibilità della Bettozzi stessa.