In a recent judgment, the Court of Fermo has maintained that, on the administrative responsibility of entities, there is no automatic mechanism that “makes the criminal responsibility of the legal representative of an entity result in the responsibility of the entity itself” regarding the crime referred to in Article 25 septies, Legislative Decree no. 231/01. This is so because this responsibility only applies if the crime has been committed in the interest or to the advantage of the entity itself, as these “concepts pertain to conduct and not to unlawfulness.” The case brought to the attention of the court concerns an accident at work occurred to a worker while he was using a press to get his job done. Even though the legal representative has been found criminally responsible, since he failed to comply with several obligations on safety at work, the Court has excluded the responsibility of the entity regarding the crime referred to in Article 25 septies, Legislative Decree no. 231/01. In fact, in the Court’s opinion, in the case at hand there is no proof that the entity has drawn a benefit from the crime committed by the legal representative “intended as benefit/utility obtained as an effect of the crime, in terms of considerable savings on expenses”, as this is a “mere underestimation of the risks and a bad consideration of the necessary prevention measures.”
