is not criminally punishable whom does the bell or knock repeatedly several times to the front door of the tenant in the apartment above to determine the cause and origin a loss of water from the pipes. For such conduct, the Supreme Court, in fact, does not include the offense of harassment or annoyance to persons expected, and punished by Article 660 of the Criminal Code because it lacks, obviously, the requirement of petulance or reprehensible reason. This is shown by the ruling 28853/09 in which the Supreme Court acquitted of the crime of disturbance to people that a condominium, however, had been sentenced to three hundred euro for having repeatedly knocked on the door of the nearby water to be lost . For the Supreme Court because there is: the objective plane is not really in dispute - and undisputed - that the building was affected by water leaks. And just as compelling is the fact that the intervention of the defendant at the home of the tenant above was motivated by the need to ascertain the source of those losses. Therefore this excludes that the alleged "noise" was the result of petulance or reason objectionable.
0 comments:
Post a Comment