Approved is not the same as approved. This is the crucial point of the judgment of the Court of Cassation concerning a fine for speeding detected by a radar on the Treviso ring road, which could open the door to hundreds of appeals from sanctioned citizens. The case of the Treviso lawyer who won the appeal to the Supreme Court presented by the Municipality of Treviso could indeed be similar to many others in the country. The man had been fined because he was driving at 97 kilometers per hour on a section of road where the limit is 90. But the detection had been carried out by an “approved” but not “approved” device, like thousands of other devices There are no radars on the roads of the Peninsula. The court ruled the violation null and void at first instance and the Supreme Court confirmed that the decision taken was in accordance with the rules and procedures described in the Highway Code.
The difference between authorization and approval of speed cameras
Although in some ministry circulars the terms approval and approval are used almost interchangeably and since 2020 the ministry has stopped approving detectors, in the Highway Code they refer to two distinct parts. Approval, as provided for by the Highway Code, consists of verifying that the mandatory characteristics imposed on the machine are respected. The approval, however, concerns characteristics not specified in the code, on which the ministry expresses its opinion, explains the specialized portal Ricorsi.net. But the ministry was not clear and the municipalities followed opaque indications, installing radars that had never before been tested for compliance with mandatory characteristics. The risk is that after the conviction, thousands of citizens will want to imitate the lawyer from Treviso, with results that could be problematic for the municipal coffers.
Read also:
