Revista Sistema Penal Crítico

Make a submission

The Decision on the Imprescriptibility of the Supreme Court Ruling 607/2020, of 13 November and its Necessary Examination from the Perspective of the right to Criminal Legality, Ex Art. 25 Ec And 7 Echr, on the Grounds of the Punitive Nature of the Ex

  • Cristina del Alcázar Viladomiu
    Universidad Pompeu Fabra

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the Supreme Court’s decision to declare civil liability ex delicto imprescriptible is respectful of the fundamental right to criminal legality, ex Art. 25 EC and Art. 7 ECHR. There are normative and jurisprudential reasons that lead us to consider that nowadays civil liability ex delicto is not a purely civil obligation but rather a legal principle that has a punitive dimension and, therefore, the guarantees of Art. 25 EC and 7 ECHR are applicable. The Supreme Court does not consider such guarantees in its decision on imprescriptibility because it is based on the immobilist position that civil liability ex delicto is of a civil nature, devoid of any punitive content. This paper attempts to support the contrary position and, on the basis of this, to determine whether or not the decision on imprescriptibility is in accordance with Art. 25 EC and 7 ECHR
  • Referencias
  • Cómo citar
  • Del mismo autor
  • Métricas
ALONSO BUZO, R. (2022). La incapacidad de pago de la responsabilidad civil en los supuestos de suspensión de la condena. La Ley Penal: revista de derecho penal, procesal y penitenciario. Nº 156. ISSN 1697-5758.

BADILLO ARIAS, J.A (2021). La imprescriptibilidad de la responsabilidad civil derivada del delito. Revista de responsabilidad civil, circulación y seguro. Nº1; ISSN 1133-6900.

BAUMBACH Trine (2011). The notion of Criminal Penalty and Lex Mitios Principle in the Scoppola v. Italy. Case. Nordic Journal of International Law. Nº 80. ISSN 0902-7351

BERMEJO CASTILLO, M.A. (2016). Responsabilidad Civil y delito en el derecho histórico español. Madrid: Dykinson. ISBN: 978-84-9148-054-9.

GIL HEREDIA, J.A (2020). Ejecución penal y responsabilidad civil derivada de delito: la suspensión ordinaria de las penas privativas de libertad. Diario La Ley. Nº 9758. ISSN 1989-6913.

GONZALEZ ORVIZ, M.E.(2008). Responsabilidad Civil derivada de delito. Sabadell: Bosch. ISBN: 9788497903912 GRANADOS PEREZ, C (2010). Responsabilidad civil ex delicto. Madrid: La Ley.ISBN: 9788481265231

HORTAL IBARRA, J.C (2014). La naturaleza jurídica de la responsabilidad civil ex delicto o cómo <<resolver>> la cuadratura del círculo. Indret. Nº4. ISSN-e 1698-739X

LOPEZ BELTRAN DE HEREDIA; C. (1997). Efectos civiles del delito y responsabilidad extracontractual. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch. ISBN: 84-8002-514-X

MUÑOZ CUESTA, J (2022) . Imprescriptibilidad de la responsabilidad civil nacida del delito. Revista Aranzadi Doctrinal. Nº2. ISSN 1889-4380

QUINTERO OLIVARES, en QUINTERO OLIVARES/CAVANILLAS MÚGICA/DE LLERA SUÁREZ-BÁRCENA (2002), La Responsabilidad Civil «Ex Delicto». Navarra: Aranzadi Thomson Reuters. ISBN: 84-8410-947-X

ROIG TORRES, M. (2000). La reparación del daño causado por el delito (aspectos civiles y penales). Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch. ISBN: 9788484421405

SANCHEZ RICARD, J. (2004). La responsabilidad civil en el proceso penal. Madrid: Wolters Kluwer. ISBN: 84-9725-575-5

SCHABAS, W (2005). The European Convention on Human Rights. A commentary

SUAREZ COLLIA, J. (2006). La retroactividad: Normas jurídicas retroactivas e irretroactivas. Madrid: Editorial Universitaria Ramón Areces, pp. 28. ISBN: 84-8004-728-3
Viladomiu, C. del A. (2023). The Decision on the Imprescriptibility of the Supreme Court Ruling 607/2020, of 13 November and its Necessary Examination from the Perspective of the right to Criminal Legality, Ex Art. 25 Ec And 7 Echr, on the Grounds of the Punitive Nature of the Ex. Revista Sistema Penal Crítico, 3, 73–90. Retrieved from https://revistas.usal.es/cuatro/index.php/2697-0007/article/view/31476

Author Biography

Cristina del Alcázar Viladomiu

,
Universidad Pompeu Fabra
The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the Supreme Court’s decision to declare civil liability ex delicto imprescriptible is respectful of the fundamental right to criminal legality, ex Art. 25 EC and Art. 7 ECHR. There are normative and jurisprudential reasons that lead us to consider that nowadays civil liability ex delicto is not a purely civil obligation but rather a legal principle that has a punitive dimension and, therefore, the guarantees of Art. 25 EC and 7 ECHR are applicable. The Supreme Court does not consider such guarantees in its decision on imprescriptibility because it is based on the immobilist position that civil liability ex delicto is of a civil nature, devoid of any punitive content. This paper attempts to support the contrary position and, on the basis of this, to determine whether or not the decision on imprescriptibility is in accordance with Art. 25 EC and 7 ECHR.
+ −