Unsuitable speed cameras, all fines to be cancelled: the Supreme Court ruling that shakes the Veneto

Just as the flap of a butterfly’s wings can cause a storm on the other side of the world, the Court of Cassation’s ruling on speed cameras can trigger a domino effect in Veneto. By canceling thousands of sanctions. Palazzaccio accepted a lawyer’s opposition to a fine, arguing that speed cameras should be authorized and also approved. But most of the Venetian ones, like the one in Treviso, do not have approval. And therefore anyone who receives a fine can appeal to the justice of the peace to have it cancelled. And if the speed camera that triggered it is only authorized but not approved, he can win and get his money back.

A cash problem

All of this could generate a cash flow problem for municipalities, especially the smaller ones. “Since 2020 the ministry has only issued authorisations, considering the two procedures equivalent for sanctioning purposes”, he explains to Corriere del Veneto the director of the local ANCI Carlo Rapicavoli. «The municipalities legitimately felt that they were in order given the indication of the competent ministers. But the recent ruling denies the interpretation always supported by the ministry.” The reform promoted by Salvini equalized the two procedures. But then this part was removed from the text. According to 2022 data, out of a total of 2.7 billion in fines paid by motorists, 51 million came from Veneto and 16 were collected with veloxes. Treviso collects 4 million every year.

The fine on the ring road

The case on which Palazzaccio decided concerns a lawyer who was speeding at 97 kilometers per hour with the limit at 90 on the ring road. The justice of the peace and the ordinary justice had accepted the lawyer’s thesis on authorization and approval. The municipality appealed to the Supreme Court. The contested ruling made a distinction between the two procedures. The approval does not require the comparison of the prototype with characteristics considered fundamental or with particular requirements, while the approval authorizes the serial reproduction of a device tested in the laboratory”, the judges wrote.

Read also: