Search results

European justice systems are facing a dramatic performance crisis due to the frequent inability to resolve cases without incurring unreasonable delays and backlogs. In this framework, the Italian Judicial system places itself well below the European countries average, in terms of speed of resolution of administrative, civil and criminal trials. The purpose of the paper was to (1) identify factors affecting Italian judicial system efficiency and (2) identify potential actions to manage them, improving judicial system efficiency.

In order to achieve the aims of this paper, a systematic review to map all critical factors discussed in previous studies was performed. Studies were extracted from Google Scholar, Web of Science and SSRN databases. In total, 22 studies were included.

The identified factors of inefficiency of the Italian judicial system have been divided into three macro-classes depending on whether they concern human resource management, the judicial process or whether they pertain to internal or external outside the judicial organization. For each of these, possible strategies have been developed in a new conceptual framework.

The framework seeks to assist policymakers in forming policy measures that can significantly increase court effectiveness. This is the first attempt to review and map all factors affecting judicial system efficiency systematically, providing a new conceptual framework to manage them.

To analyze the Italian Supreme Court decision (case no. 11626/2020) and its potential implications for foreign financial institutions operating in Italy.

This article provides firstly a brief description of Decree 231/2001 and of its application to financial institutions, then a description of the Italian Supreme Court decision and, lastly, a set of inputs to foreign financial institutions operating in Italy.

Following the decision under review, where the further conditions set out in the Decree 231/2001 are met, entities are liable under the same Decree when a relevant offense occurs in Italy – or there is Italian jurisdiction – regardless of their nationality, the localization of their registered office, the place where they predominantly carry out their business or whether there are rules governing the same matter in the State of origin.

Following the decision under review, foreign financial institutions operating in Italy should adopt and implement the control measures required by the Decree 231/2001 in order to avoid incurring the relevant sanctions.

This is an analysis of the potential practical implications for foreign financial institutions operating in Italy of a decision issued by the Italian Supreme Court that may also provide useful advice to mitigate the potential risks linked to it.

The paper discusses how the Commission is shaping a decentralisation policy in the antitrust field. The paper details the procedural architecture ‐ “degrees of priority”, “preconditions for decentralisation” and “Community interest” ‐ which gives the Commission sole discretion to decide whether an antitrust case is dealt with by Brussels or is referred to a Member State. It reveals that the decentralisation procedure has been set up by the Commission, with the blessing of the Community courts, but with little real consultation with the Member States. The paper points out that the decision whether to decentralise turns on a new, qualitative and Commission decided Community interest test. The paper emphasises that the Community interest test runs in parallel with ‐ and has a similar function to ‐ a number of decentralisation provisions which already exist. The final section of the paper contrasts Community interest as a decentralisation test with the rival, and pre‐existing, quantitative approach to decentralisation ‐ the Community dimension test ‐ contained in the EC Merger Control Regulation (MCR). It explains that both tests have strengths and weaknesses and that the recent reform of the MCR has not fully addressed these concerns in respect to Community dimension. The paper’s main conclusion is that the Commission’s appropriation of the ability to decide which Member States are competent to deal with decentralised antitrust cases has created the possibility of a fragmented or two‐speed Europe in competition regulation.

In the 1990s and beginning of the next decade, a series of financial accounting scandals occurred in the United States (USA or US) and in several other countries of the world. The USA and Italy (among others) responded with legislation to reform financial reporting and corporate governance in these jurisdictions. This paper aims to compare the regulatory response of Italy to that of the USA.

This paper includes a review of relevant literature and evaluation of the actions of the regulatory authorities.

In the case of the financial reporting crises, the rapid response put the USA into the role of the “first mover” with the European Union (EU) reacting to US initiatives and eventually converging to a large degree with the provisions of the US legislation. Italy has adopted many of the same regulatory reforms as the USA and has added some reforms that are directed to the specific needs to Italy.

In conjunction with legislative initiatives like Sarbanes-Oxley, private enforcement mechanisms, such as shareholder class action suits in the USA, play an important role in discouraging and punishing financial accounting fraud.

In the absence of significant reforms of the Italian private enforcement system, corporate governance abuses and the potential for accounting scandals may still be persistent. As a whole, cooperative efforts continue between the USA and the EU. Such efforts are needed more and more, as companies become increasingly globalized.

This paper provides comparison and evaluation of corporate governance reform efforts in the USA and Italy.

The purpose of this study is to underline the impact that globalization of financial markets has on national punishment policies. The US financial crisis has strongly affected consumers’ lives, but the focus of this research is on the national provisions against the illegal and unfair behaviour of economic actors, with special regard to a phenomenon that took place abroad, but whose effects came to light in many different countries.

Different methodological approaches, both deductive and inductive, are combined in the present paper, together with comparative and philosophical insights on national Court decisions and scholar writings.

As European Union (EU) member States experts are discussing about a lex mercatoria for the financial markets to govern the EU integration process, this study highlights some questions concerning mainly three aspects: the level of censorship; forms and nature of responsibility; punitive models and their micro- and macro-economic effects.

The study offers insights into the possible answers in terms of criminal and private law remedies to fight financial market abuse in a global dimension, through the use of general principles of contractual and tort law, which are common among EU member State, as culpa in eligendo, culpa in vigilando, duty of information, duty of care, ecc […] .

To illuminate a new field of legal study – offshore financial law, especially the offshore trust and how it impacts on financial crime.

Analytical approach to case law and legislation relevant to the topic.

Offshore financial law and offshore trusts are innovative, dynamic vehicles for trust and tax planning internationally but have to address avenues for financial crime.

Original and pioneering research into a new area of law. Practitioners in finance law, trusts and tax, academics, legal regulators, accountants and other finance practitioners will find it particularly helpful.

That on accountability in public organizations is quite an old debate. Its introduction in judicial systems is, however, still viewed with some suspicion, due to its potential trade-off with independence and impartiality. Nevertheless, the need to respond to the demands for greater transparency and accountability has also pushed judicial organizations to establish a dialogue with a wide range of subjects. This study aims to explore the understanding and the current practices of sustainability reporting currently in place in judicial systems.

The study adopts a comparative approach, conducting an online survey in two European countries (Italy and Poland). The survey was built around the research questions and literature and administered between February and March 2020. Specifically, 804 courts were involved, of which 430 are in Italy and 374 in Poland.

Findings show that the current practices are still not widespread and there is still a lack of understanding of what sustainability reporting is, and therefore, of what its potential usefulness within the courts could be. Moreover, many differences between the two countries are pointed out, so it is possible to assume that the different cultural and institutional settings influence sustainability reporting practices. Finally, some interesting implications for policymakers are provided.

Judicial organizations are still poorly investigated in the literature, despite being at the center of a wide public and political debate. Moreover, the international comparative perspective adopted constitutes a further aspect of novelty.

This chapter contributes to a corpus of legal–anthropological studies concerning the role of cultural experts in legal institutions. It begins by identifying the reasons behind the fragile collaboration between Italian courts and cultural experts and outlining some of the consequences of this relationship. It then presents a collection of cases involving cultural experts including a focus on the L’Aquila trial recounted from first-hand experience by Antonello Ciccozzi, the anthropologist who acted as expert consultant. The conclusions attempt to summarize the “state of the art” of cultural expertise in Italian courts today and call for greater collaboration between law and anthropology as a means of guaranteeing a fair trial.

This study investigates the presence of a productivity–quality trade-off in judicial decisions from an organisational standpoint, focusing on the courts as bureaucracies. Applied to the Italian context and focusing on criminal courts, the main question addressed is whether or not increasing productivity diminishes decision quality.

Directional distance function (DDF) models were utilised to assess productivity. Two-sample t-tests are then used to compare the quality of efficient and inefficient units in first instance and appeal, with the aim to determine whether a productivity–quality trade-off exists.

The study’s approach yields results that differ from previous studies. (1) The Italian judicial system is found less efficient. (2) The efficiency of the courts of first instance is relatively uniform. In contrast, there is a difference in efficiency between northern and southern courts of appeal, with northern courts on average being more efficient. (3) The analysis reveals a statistically significant productivity–quality trade-off when the courts of appeal are considered.

New evidence of a judicial system is presented, suggesting reforms regarding “reasonable time” as the optimal balance between quality and productivity.

The organisational framework leads to evaluating the efficiency of the courts by considering the various types of proceedings based on the gravity/complexity of the cases. In light of the pyramidal structure of the justice system, the quality is then defined in terms of hierarchical control expressed as review rate.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a reflection on the importance of individual environmental protection, which recognizes the right of every citizen to take action to obtain compensation for environmental damage, as a damage to his or her existential condition. One of the most discussed environmental issues in Italy today is the lack of personal protection because the European legislator has provided for a public protection of environmental damage.

Design/methodology/approach based on the analysis of a well-known environmental disaster, the case of ex Ilva, the author shows how in Italy there is a dangerous lack of protection in environmental matters that contrasts with the consideration of the environment as a fundamental constitutional value of Italian and European law and the affirmation of the principle of sustainable development.

Findings the reconstruction of the environment as a common good aimed at realizing the fundamental needs of the person according to the theory of common goods and damage to the environment as an existential damage finds in the pronouncement of the European Court relevant confirmations. As a result of an individual legitimation alternative to the choice of the European legislator to confine the protection in the public sector.

This work will examine recent Italian cases concerning environmental disaster, the case of ex Ilva. This paper is the original work of the author and has not been submitted elsewhere for publication.