L'auto condotta in stato di ebbrezza può essere sequestrata – in vista della confisca – anche se è in leasing, e quindi non appartiene al guidatore. La quarta sezione penale della Cassazione (sentenza 10688/2010, depositata il 18 marzo 2010) allarga il perimetro della confisca come sanzione ulteriormente afflittiva per chi è sorpreso ubriaco al volante, confermando lo spossessamento di una Audi Q7 fermata a un controllo stradale il 10 giugno scorso a Fermo.
I giudici di merito non avevano avuto dubbi nel disporre and then maintain the seizure: the decision of the magistrate was associated with a few weeks after the Court of Review, which had rejected the defense argument that the vehicle was headed to a third party (the leasing company, in fact), and that the periculum notice (ie the risk of new violations of Article 186 of the Rules of the road) would be offset by the driver's license suspension.
The Supreme Court, in synthetic reasons for rejecting the further appeal, said that the property held under lease "belongs to the entity to which it was given the availability of material goods themselves, and even if it is not" property " This was le somiglia molto perché è di fatto un «diritto a godere del bene, sulla base di un titolo che esclude i terzi».
Pertanto, «appare evidente la legittimità del sequestro di un veicolo il cui conducente sorpreso alla guida in stato di ebbrezza (...) ne abbia la disponibilità in forza di un contratto di leasing». Lo stesso periculum in mora di reiterazione può essere garantito solo dal sequestro, atteso che la sospensione della patente è un provvedimento, per sua natura, temporaneo. Quanto ai diritti della società di leasing, l'auto deve essere dissequestrata solo di fronte alla dimostrazione della cessazione del contratto di locazione finanziaria.
La sentenza del 18 marzo quindi conferma una linea of rigor in applying the confiscation of the vehicle, the security package introduced in 2008 (DL 92/08) for severe cases of intoxication (Article 186 of the Highway Code) and for driving under the influence of drugs (Article 187 ). The seizure creates a series of problems since, for a general principle, can not fire when the movement of the vehicle is against the will of the owner or when they were extraneous to the infringement, which occurs when the vehicle is registered to someone other than the driver . This applies not only to leasing and rental, but also of the Joint account. In this respect, the judgments are read much guaranteed, like the one last year at the Bologna excluded confiscabilità just because the offender was in communion with his wife of goods (in this case, the co-ownership exists by law). But the Supreme Court now seems to have taken a far more restrictive.
This became a ruling from the 45,938 of 1 December 2009: according to the Fourth Criminal Division, so as not to trigger the confiscation of the vehicle must be fully registered to a third party unconnected because cointestato imply that the offender uses the means not only occasionally, and then if they retain the use could still use it in a way that constitutes danger.
I giudici di merito non avevano avuto dubbi nel disporre and then maintain the seizure: the decision of the magistrate was associated with a few weeks after the Court of Review, which had rejected the defense argument that the vehicle was headed to a third party (the leasing company, in fact), and that the periculum notice (ie the risk of new violations of Article 186 of the Rules of the road) would be offset by the driver's license suspension.
The Supreme Court, in synthetic reasons for rejecting the further appeal, said that the property held under lease "belongs to the entity to which it was given the availability of material goods themselves, and even if it is not" property " This was le somiglia molto perché è di fatto un «diritto a godere del bene, sulla base di un titolo che esclude i terzi».
Pertanto, «appare evidente la legittimità del sequestro di un veicolo il cui conducente sorpreso alla guida in stato di ebbrezza (...) ne abbia la disponibilità in forza di un contratto di leasing». Lo stesso periculum in mora di reiterazione può essere garantito solo dal sequestro, atteso che la sospensione della patente è un provvedimento, per sua natura, temporaneo. Quanto ai diritti della società di leasing, l'auto deve essere dissequestrata solo di fronte alla dimostrazione della cessazione del contratto di locazione finanziaria.
La sentenza del 18 marzo quindi conferma una linea of rigor in applying the confiscation of the vehicle, the security package introduced in 2008 (DL 92/08) for severe cases of intoxication (Article 186 of the Highway Code) and for driving under the influence of drugs (Article 187 ). The seizure creates a series of problems since, for a general principle, can not fire when the movement of the vehicle is against the will of the owner or when they were extraneous to the infringement, which occurs when the vehicle is registered to someone other than the driver . This applies not only to leasing and rental, but also of the Joint account. In this respect, the judgments are read much guaranteed, like the one last year at the Bologna excluded confiscabilità just because the offender was in communion with his wife of goods (in this case, the co-ownership exists by law). But the Supreme Court now seems to have taken a far more restrictive.
This became a ruling from the 45,938 of 1 December 2009: according to the Fourth Criminal Division, so as not to trigger the confiscation of the vehicle must be fully registered to a third party unconnected because cointestato imply that the offender uses the means not only occasionally, and then if they retain the use could still use it in a way that constitutes danger.
0 comments:
Post a Comment