The Court of Cassation has emphasized that auction disruption is considered a crime under D.Lgs. 231/01 and may lead to administrative responsibility for entities in decision number 33859/2024. In particular, the offence committed by a director may expose the institution to severe penalties if it is not equipped with an effective organisational model.

The ruling stated that such an offence does not exist in contracts concluded by the public administration through private negotiations, when the latter is not part of a collective agreement. However, if the private negotiation takes place through a tender, even informal, the offence may be established. The Court pointed out that the expressions "public tender" or "private tenders" used by art. 353 c.p. do not refer exclusively to the procurement procedures, but include any kind of comparison, even atypical, aimed at identifying a public administration contractor, provided that it guarantees competition between the bidders. However, it is not enough to have more than one candidate to qualify as a tender. They must submit separate tenders and the administration must retain full freedom to choose the most advantageous tender, without it being a mere private negotiation, which cannot constitute an offence of disturbance.

The judgment therefore reaffirms the importance for companies to adopt organisational models that can prevent offences such as auction disruption. An effective model 231 should provide for targeted protocols, staff training and internal control systems to ensure transparency and prevent wrongful conduct. In addition to reducing the risk of sanctions, these measures also protect the integrity and reputation of the organisation, which are essential elements in today’s competitive landscape.