{"id":3403,"date":"2017-04-03T16:54:39","date_gmt":"2017-04-03T14:54:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/"},"modified":"2024-07-12T18:30:04","modified_gmt":"2024-07-12T16:30:04","slug":"news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/","title":{"rendered":"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n Only knocks out victim’s tooth, but for Supreme Court, injuries are aggravated
\n<\/u>
\n<\/strong>According to the Supreme Court (judgment Jan. 28, 2015, no. 4177<\/a>) on the subject of personal injury, even the avulsion of a single tooth triggers the aggravating circumstance referred to in Article 583 of the Criminal Code. The aforementioned fact, the Supreme Court clarifies, is in fact an even minimal impairment of the potential of an organ and is, therefore, sufficient to have permanent weakening, regardless of the possibility of applying a dental prosthesis.<\/span>
\nThus the Ermimians upheld a man’s conviction for the crime of aggravated injury for causing the “complete traumatic avulsion of an upper incisor” suffered by the offended person. To no avail were the defenses of the defendant, who pointed out the circumstance that the victim had not suffered any weakening since the injuries had not permanently affected his masticatory apparatus.<\/span><\/p>\n


\n Drunk driving: fair to breathalyze cyclists as well
\n<\/u>
\n<\/strong>The Supreme Court, in ruling no. 4893 dated 2.02.2015, clarified that the crime of driving while intoxicated can also be committed by cyclists.<\/span>
\nThe Supreme Court has, in fact, pointed out that for the purposes of integrating the illegal conduct under Article 186 of the Highway Code<\/a>, the number of wheels of the vehicle driven or the presence of a motor, have no relevance. What matters is the actual suitability of the vehicle to interfere with the smooth and safe flow of road traffic, resulting in the creation of an objective and concrete danger to the safety and integrity of the public of road users.<\/span><\/p>\n


\n If she remained “illibate,” the marriage is void, even in the absence of objective certainty
\n<\/u>
\n<\/strong>In a recent ruling (No. 1729\/2015), the Supreme Court of Cassation clarified that in the case of an application for annulment of marriage due to non-consummation of the marriage by the spouses if the statements made by the parties’ counsel assume decisive content in the course of the proceedings, they are suitable for obtaining a ruling that the marriage is null and void.<\/span>
\nAnd this, the Court continues, even in cases where it is difficult to ascertain, with absolute certainty, whether or not the woman remained illibate until marriage: in fact, the gynecological evaluation does not always succeed in excluding or confirming the lack of complete intercourse with her husband.<\/span>
\nBased on these assumptions, the Justices of legitimacy upheld the ruling of the Naples Court of Appeals declaring that the civil effects of marriage between two spouses had ceased due to non-consummation.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Only knocks out victim’s tooth, but for Supreme Court, injuries are aggravated According to the Supreme Court (judgment Jan. 28, 2015, no. 4177) on the subject of personal injury, even the avulsion of a single tooth triggers the aggravating circumstance referred to in Article 583 of the Criminal Code. The aforementioned fact, the Supreme Court […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1579],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nNews Supreme Court rulings February 2015 | Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015 | Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Only knocks out victim’s tooth, but for Supreme Court, injuries are aggravated According to the Supreme Court (judgment Jan. 28, 2015, no. 4177) on the subject of personal injury, even the avulsion of a single tooth triggers the aggravating circumstance referred to in Article 583 of the Criminal Code. The aforementioned fact, the Supreme Court […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-04-03T14:54:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-07-12T16:30:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/\",\"name\":\"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015 | Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2017-04-03T14:54:39+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-07-12T16:30:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/8b0b860d2b7601ca6a4311f242de2a21\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/\",\"name\":\"Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo\",\"description\":\"Law firm Vercelli\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/8b0b860d2b7601ca6a4311f242de2a21\",\"name\":\"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f932909c7270f43610ba542ce7297f2?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f932909c7270f43610ba542ce7297f2?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/author\/studio-legale-randazzo-e-roncarolo\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015 | Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015 | Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo","og_description":"Only knocks out victim’s tooth, but for Supreme Court, injuries are aggravated According to the Supreme Court (judgment Jan. 28, 2015, no. 4177) on the subject of personal injury, even the avulsion of a single tooth triggers the aggravating circumstance referred to in Article 583 of the Criminal Code. The aforementioned fact, the Supreme Court […]","og_url":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/","og_site_name":"Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo","article_published_time":"2017-04-03T14:54:39+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-07-12T16:30:04+00:00","author":"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/","url":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/","name":"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015 | Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2017-04-03T14:54:39+00:00","dateModified":"2024-07-12T16:30:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/8b0b860d2b7601ca6a4311f242de2a21"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/news-supreme-court-rulings-february-2015\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"News Supreme Court rulings February 2015"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/","name":"Law firm Randazzo e Roncarolo","description":"Law firm Vercelli","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/8b0b860d2b7601ca6a4311f242de2a21","name":"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f932909c7270f43610ba542ce7297f2?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f932909c7270f43610ba542ce7297f2?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Studio Legale Randazzo e Roncarolo"},"url":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/author\/studio-legale-randazzo-e-roncarolo\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3403"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3403"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3403\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3414,"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3403\/revisions\/3414"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/studiolegalevercelli.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}