The state of anger revealed via email to more than one person by the person who does not receive a promised payment is not punishable by applying the exemption provided for from art. 599, paragraph 2 of the penal code according to which "Whoever has committed any of the acts foreseen in article 595 (which punishes the defamation (ed. note) in a state of anger caused by an unjust act by another, and immediately after it”.
This is even more true when this anger is fueled by comments from other users on social networks due to the debtor's failure to pay.
This is what has been established by Cassation in a criminal judgment issued in mid-August 2018.
The Supreme College The Court declared inadmissible the appeal of the civil party contesting the acquittal in both levels of proceedings of a person who had sent an abusive email to multiple recipients due to unpaid invoices.
In particular, the case originated from a ruling of the Court of Turin which in turn confirmed the sentence of the Justice of the Peace of the transalpine city, with which the defendant had been acquitted from the crime pursuant to art. 595 of the Criminal Code, with the formula "“because the act does not constitute a crime", considering the exemption of provocation pursuant to art. 599, paragraph 2, of the Criminal Code to be in force.
In particular, the case originated from a ruling of the Court of Turin which in turn confirmed the sentence of the Justice of the Peace of the transalpine city, with which the defendant had been acquitted from the crime pursuant to art. 595 of the Criminal Code, with the formula "“because the act does not constitute a crime", considering the exemption of provocation pursuant to art. 599, paragraph 2, of the Criminal Code to be in force.
The lower courts held that the insults contained in the email were justified, as they were the result of the defendant's exasperation over the company's behavior, which had, up to that point, failed to pay the invoices for the services it had provided (by virtue of granting the company, through an online collaboration agreement, the right to advertise on its website). This exasperation was further fueled by the continued silence regarding the payment requests, as well as by the fact that the defendant had learned from comments on other websites that the company had also defaulted on its payments to other parties.
Follow on NOVA-Il sole 24 ore
English 
Italian 