http://news.ilcaso.it/news_4826
It's true. Telematic tools help us... when they work!
However, we must use extraordinary diligence in using them.
As far as the PEC mailbox is concerned, we should equip ourselves with an automatic service to warn of imminent saturation. This is because if the sender receives the “error” message for “full mailbox” and the consequent warning: “the message was rejected by the system”, the notification of the communication will be correctly filed with the registry and consequently the defender may not be aware of it.
In fact, it is believed that the communication sent via PEC and not received due to the recipient's "full mailbox" is attributable to him.
Failure to verify the actual availability of available disk space and failure to fulfill the obligation to equip ourselves with an automatic service that warns us of the impending saturation of the mailbox can be a serious problem.
Therefore, the lawyer has the obligation to ensure the correct functioning and regular receipt of e-mail messages.
Given that I think it is correct to frequently monitor the functionality of the PEC mailbox,
I humbly prefer, rather than filing it in the registry, that the communication be sent via email or fax.
I still own it.
Even though it is hardly used anymore…
