Justice, additional incentives for remotely applied magistrates

Somewhat more robust incentives, measures for those out of office, removal of proceedings with prior consultation from the catalogue of those to be counted for the achievement of the Pnrr objectives. The decree-law scheme also contains measures on the justice front. The aim is to try to get as close as possible to that target, now considered rather unrealistic, of a 40% reduction, by June 2026 and compared to 31 December 2019, of the time taken to handle all civil disputes.

Thus, it is provided that the magistrates attached to the Office of the Supreme Court of Cassation for the performance of judicial functions of legitimacy in civil matters are entitled to an indemnity in an amount corresponding to three times the monthly indemnity provided for in Article 2(1) and (2) of Law 133 of 1998, paid at the end of the period of application (approximately €12,000 gross).

It also allows magistrates placed out of tenure in locations outside the national territory to participate in the call for applications for remote application launched by the Csm. The decree then intervenes to provide for the possibility for the magistrate applied remotely who has defined both the first fifty and the second fifty proceedings assigned to him to be assigned, after an expression of willingness, a further fifty proceedings, to be defined peremptorily within 30 June 2026, also providing that he be paid an additional allowance of a similar amount, 12,000 euros per month, on condition that he has defined, within the term of the application, the additional fifty civil proceedings assigned to him.

The provisions on justice also intervene on the subject of preventive technical assessment and preventive technical consultancy for the settlement of litigation, detailing a mechanism for the suspension and subsequent settlement of proceedings. The regulation of thesuspension resumes the one introduced in Article 445-bis of the Code by Decree-Law 117 of 2025 and is also justified by the absence of judicial activity pending the performance of the consultancy.

Considering these proceedings as pending during the performance of the consultant's activity determines, it is observed, "an inaccurate representation of the times of the trial, given that no judicial activity is contemplated after the appointment of the Ctu. The intervention is characterised by necessity and urgency in that the pendency of such proceedings is unjustifiably counted, even in the absence of judicial activity, for the purpose of verifying the achievement of the Pnrr objectives, thus jeopardising their achievement'.