Commentary on Ordinance No. 23252 of 08/28/2024: Evidentiary Value of Inspection Reports

The recent Ordinance No. 23252 of August 28, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers important clarifications regarding the evidentiary value of reports drawn up by the labor inspectorate and officials of social security institutions. This issue is of crucial importance in the Italian legal landscape, especially for disputes concerning employment relationships and social security contributions.

Meaning of the Ruling

The Court has established that reports drawn up by public officials, such as labor inspectors, are considered authentic until a claim of falsity is made, concerning their origin and the facts attested to as having occurred in the inspector's presence. This means that, in case of dispute, the opposing party bears the burden of providing contrary evidence. This principle is based on the reliability of public documents and their evidentiary value.

Reports drawn up by the labor inspectorate, or by officials of social security institutions regarding communications of the establishment of employment relationships and non-payment of contributions, are considered authentic until a claim of falsity is made, concerning their origin from the public official who drafted them and the facts that the latter attests to have occurred in his presence, or to have been carried out by him, with the consequence that the burden of providing proof to the contrary falls on the opposing party; however, for other factual circumstances that the reporting officer indicates having ascertained during the investigation because they were learned "de relato" or following inspection of documents, the law does not attribute any pre-established evidentiary value to the report, not even a simple presumption, but the material collected by the reporting officer must be freely assessed by the judge, who can evaluate its importance for the purpose of proof, but can never attribute to it the value of a true and proper ascertainment by placing the burden of proving the non-existence of the contested facts on the opposing party.

Practical Implications of the Ruling

The practical implications of this ruling are manifold and deserve attention. Legal professionals and companies must be aware that inspection reports have significant evidentiary weight, but with limitations. Here are some key considerations:

• Reports drawn up in the inspector's presence are considered more robust and require contrary evidence from the opposing party.
• For facts ascertained "de relato," the judge has the discretion to assess their importance, without automatic evidentiary value.
• The ruling emphasizes the importance of correct documentation and adequate defense in case of disputes.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 23252 of 2024 clarifies a fundamental aspect of evidentiary law in the employment context. Reports drawn up by public bodies can represent a powerful weapon in case of litigation, but it is essential to understand the limits of their effectiveness. Therefore, both companies and workers should pay particular attention to documentation and inspection procedures to ensure the correct management of their legal positions.