Published on 15 July 2025
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 57296/22
BOMODI S.R.L against Italy
and 10 other applications
(see list appended)
communicated on 23 June 2025
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applications concern searches carried out in the applicants’ registered offices and business premises or, with regards to application no. 35523/23, in the professional domicile of the applicant’s accountant, in the context of tax assessment investigations, as detailed in the appended table. The authorisations to undertake the searches (ordine di accesso “search warrants”) were issued pursuant to Articles 52 and 63 of Presidential Decree no. 633 of 1972 and Article 33 of Presidential Decree no.600 of 1973.
The applicants complain of the allegedly unlawful search of their registered offices, business premises or professional domiciles and of the lack of an effective judicial or independent review. In particular, under Article 8 of the Convention, they complain:
(i) of the lack of an ex ante judicial scrutiny of the lawfulness of the search warrants, as the decisions to authorise the searches were taken by the tax authorities themselves or by the financial police (“Guardia di finanza”);
(ii) of the absence of any reasonable suspicion that an offence had been committed, which might have justified the interference with their Article 8 rights;
(iii) that the search warrants were extremely vague, as they did not indicate the evidence already available to the authorities nor predetermined the scope and purpose of the searches, in particular by indicating the items that the authorities expected to find as evidence of the offences being investigated.
The applicants further complain under Article 6 and/or Article 8 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 13 about the lack of access to court to contest the alleged breach of their rights to home and privacy. In particular, they complain of the absence in the Italian legal system of a judicial remedy directly accessible and aimed at assessing the lawfulness of, and justification for, the search warrants. In their view, search warrants are not subject to a direct appeal, pursuant to Article 19 of Decree no. 471 of 1997. They can be challenged only at the end of the tax assessment proceedings, provided that a final administrative act (“avviso di accertamento del tributo”) has been adopted, and provided that it has been based on information and evidence gathered through the search.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their “home” and “correspondence”, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was the interference in conformity with the requirements of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention? In particular:
(a) Was the interference “in accordance with the law” in terms of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention, that is to say, in accordance with a law which was accessible to the applicants, foreseeable in its application and consequences and compatible with the rule of law (Tortladze v. Georgia, no. 42371/08, § 56, 18 March 2021, and Brazzi v. Italy, no. 57278/11. § 39, 27 September 2018)? With regard to the latter condition, did the said law provide some protection against the allegedly arbitrary interference with the applicants’ Article 8 rights (Ben Faiza v. France, no. 31446/12, § 59, 8 February 2018)? Specifically:
(i) Did it establish an ex ante independent or judicial supervision of the search warrants, capable of reviewing their lawfulness and/or limiting the investigating authorities’ discretion to assess the expediency and scope of the searches (Heino v. Finland, no. 56720/09, § 40, 15 February)?
(ii) Did it give the applicants and the authorities an adequate indication as to the circumstances in which, and conditions on which, the authorities are entitled to resort to measures affecting the applicants’ Article 8 rights (Ben Faiza, cited above, § 59, and Budak v. Turkey, no. 69762/12, § 43, 16 February 2021)?
(iii) Did it provide for an ex post facto judicial review of the lawfulness of, and justification for, the search warrants (Kuzminas v. Russia, no. 69810/11, § 24, 21 December 2021, and Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, no. 34529/10, § 222, 15 October 2013)?
(b) Was the interference “necessary in a democratic society” and proportionate to the aim pursued, within the meaning of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention (see, among others, K.S. and M.S. v. Germany, no. 33696/11, § 44, 6 October 2016)? Specifically:
(i) Were the search warrants sufficiently reasoned and specific in their content? Did they contain an explicit and detailed reference of the offences being investigated and of the evidence already available to the authorities at that time (Leotsakos v. Greece, no. 30958/13, § 49, 4 October 2018, and Modestou v. Greece, no. 51693/13, §§ 45 et seq., 16 March 2017)?
(ii) Was the scope and purpose of the searches sufficiently precise and limited, with an indication in the warrants of the items sought as evidence of the offences being investigated (Modestou, §§ 46 et seq., and Gutsanovi, § 224, both cited above)?
2. Did the applicants have access to a court for the determination of their civil rights under Article 8 of the Convention, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Société Canal Plus and Others v. France, no. 29408/08, § 40, 21 December 2010; Compagnie des gaz de pétrole Primagaz v. France, no. 29613/08, § 30, 21 December 2010; and Ravon and Others v. France, no. 18497/03, §§ 28, 31 and 33, 21 February 2008), or to an effective remedy, in accordance with Article 13 of the Convention, in order to challenge the lawfulness of, and justification for, the “search warrants”?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Case name
Introduction date
Applicant’s name
Year of birth/registration
Place of residence
Nationality
Representative’s name
Location
Authorisation to carry out the audits
Authority issuing the authorisation
Justification and scope of the measure
Access to the premises
Collected evidence
1.
57296/22
Bomodi S.R.L. v. Italy
05/12/2022
BOMODI S.R.L.
2021
Foggia
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
25/11/2022
Head of Revenue Police in Foggia
Check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations from 01/01/2022 to 25/11/2022.
25/11/2022
Requested to submit any relevant documents relating to accounting (including off-the-books records), the person delegated by the applicant company’s legal representative clarified that the documents were stored by the company’s consultant and declared they would be submitted later to the revenue police. An appointment was scheduled for 28/11/2022.
In the absence of the requested documentation, the Revenue Police carried out an inspection, requesting the submission of all relevant administrative and accounting documents.
2.
19277/23
Ital Gomme Pneumatici S.r.l. v. Italy
09/05/2023
ITAL GOMME PNEUMATICI S.R.L.
2009
Foggia
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
14/03/2023
Head of Revenue Police in Foggia
Check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations. for 2020, 2022 and 2023 until 14/03/2023.
14/03/2023
The Revenue Police collected the following: electronic copies of accounting records, company books, invoices and other mandatory documents.
The company’s legal representative clarified that the remaining administrative-accounting documents were stored by the company’s consultant, who copied the electronic documents to an external drive and gave it to the Revenue Police on the day of the access.
3.
19295/23
T-Link S.r.l. v. Italy
09/05/2023
T-LINK S.R.L.
2017
Milano
Italian
Ornella BONASSISA
Foggia
09/03/2023
Head of Revenue Police in Vicenza
Extend the ongoing tax assessment to check the applicant company’s economic and commercial relations with clients and suppliers from 2017 to 2022. At the request of a different unit of the Revenue Police, check the transfers made to a specific client in 2021 and 2022.
09/03/2023
Requested to submit all invoices, banking documents, VAT journals, book of first entry and accounting ledger for the relevant years, the applicant company clarified that all documents had been digitalised and saved in a cloud archive and that all the relevant accounting documents for the year 2017 were stored by the consultant. The latter was contacted and agreed to allow the police to collect the relevant documents from his office.
The Revenue Police collected the following: banking documents, contracts, transfer documents, cloud archive, back-ups of different e-mail accounts found on the personal computers of an administrative employee and of the applicant company’s sole director.
4.
20116/23
Amatori v. Italy
09/05/2023
Ruggero AMATORI
1962
Torri di Quartesolo (VI)
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
09/03/2023
Head of Revenue Police in Vicenza
Extend the ongoing tax assessment relating to the company of which the applicant was the sole director to check its economic and commercial relations with clients and suppliers from 2017 to 2022. At the request of a different unit of the Revenue Police, check the company’s transfers made to a specific client in 2021 and 2022.
09/03/2023
The Revenue Police made back-ups of several e-mail accounts found on the applicant’s personal computer, including his personal e-mail accounts.
5.
30539/23
Associazione Culturale Strumenti e Figure v. Italy
21/07/2023
ASSOCIAZIONE CULTURALE STRUMENTI E FIGURE
Lucera
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
18/05/2023
Foggia Tax Authority
Check the applicant company’s activity and compliance with accounting and tax obligations for 2019.
Reasons justifying the measure:
- company was not subject to any recent tax assessment;
- check access requirements for tax benefits for non-commercial entities;
- absence of tax payments on behalf of the company.
22/05/2023
Requested to submit all accounting records, company books, journals, invoices and other mandatory documents, the company’s legal representative handed over part of the relevant documents and scheduled an appointment for 25/05/2023 to submit the list of members and the company books.
6.
35523/23
Lg Costruzioni S.R.L.S. v. Italy
19/09/2023
LG COSTRUZIONI S.R.L.S.
2015
Manfredonia
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
09/08/2023
Head of Revenue Police in Manfredonia
Access to the office of the applicant company’s accountant to check its compliance with tax obligations from 01/01/2020 to 09/08/2023.
09/08/2023 (access to the premises of the office of the company’s accountant and of a company connected to the applicant company)
Requested to submit the relevant accounting documentation, the applicant company’s accountant clarified that the documents were stored by company C., connected to the applicant company.
The search continued on the same day in the registered offices of the company C.
Requested to provide all the relevant accounting documentation, company C. submitted the following: book of first entry, VAT registers, VAT and tax declarations, invoices and other accounting documents.
7.
41369/23
Stefano S.R.L. Unipersonale v. Italy
15/11/2023
STEFANO S.R.L. UNIPERSONALE
2011
Foggia
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
26/09/2023
Foggia Tax Authority
Check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations for 2018 and its compliance with accounting and labour legislation for 2023.
Reasons justifying the measure:
- low income;
- company was not subject to any tax assessment in the last five years;
- several violations for failure to issue tax receipt;
- presence of undeclared workers;
- connection to other audit carried out by the Revenue Police.
26/09/2023
The company’s legal representative agreed to provide the relevant documents in the following days.
The Authority also acquired ID documents of all the workers present.
8.
3258/24
Europoligrafico S.p.A. v. Italy
22/01/2024
EUROPOLIGRAFICO S.P.A.
2007
Verona
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
03/10/2023
Verona Tax Authority
Check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations for 2017 and 2018.
The checks may be extended to other tax periods and to off-the-books records.
Reasons justifying the measure:
- investigation to assess possible tax violations.
04/10/2023
The company was requested to provide clarifications and documents (inventory log, invoices, minutes of shareholders and board of director meetings, payroll register).
9.
14982/24
World Rent S.r.l. v. Italy
14/05/2024
WORLD RENT S.R.L.
2019
Mafredonia
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
07/05/2024
Head of Revenue Police in Rimini
Check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations from 01/01/2020 to 07/05/2024
07/05/2024
The applicant company was requested to submit: inventory logbooks, books of first entry, accounting ledgers, VAT registers, invoices, bank statements, payroll register, minutes of the shareholders meetings, journal of board of directors decisions for the relevant years.
The Revenue Police collected the following: banking documents, invoices, contracts, pay checks and other documents.
10.
15537/24
Cosmic Impianti S.R.L. v. Italy
14/05/2024
COSMIC IMPIANTI S.R.L.
Manfredonia
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
29/01/2024
Foggia Tax Authority
Check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations for 2021, allowing an extension to other tax periods in relation to operations connected to 2021. Check the company’s compliance with accounting and labour legislation for 2024.
Reasons justifying the measure:
- company was not subject to any tax assessment in the last five years;
- income lower than average;
- company held a VAT credit for 2021.
31/01/2024
The applicant company submitted the following: invoices, inventory book, book of first entry, accounting ledger, VAT registers, minutes of shareholder meetings, assets register and annual financial statements. The applicant company was requested to submit additional documents.
11.
32692/24
Mhg, S.R.L. v. Italy
24/10/2024
MHG, S.R.L.
2002
Peschici
Italian
Cristiano STASI
Foggia
27/09/2024
Foggia Tax Authority
Check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations for 2021, allowing an extension to other tax periods in relation to operations connected to 2021. Check the company’s compliance with accounting and labour legislation for 2024.
Reasons justifying the measure:
- company was not subject to any tax assessment in the last five years;
- substantial decrease in business income;
- company held a VAT credit for 2021.
30/09/2024 and 01/10/2024
The applicant company provided access to the relevant requested documentation and agreed to submit the remaining missing documents as soon as possible.