Commentary on Judgment Cass. civ., Section I, No. 34950 of 2022: Recognition of Paternity and Parental Obligations

Judgment No. 34950 of November 28, 2022, by the Court of Cassation offers important insights into the topic of paternity recognition and parental obligations. Specifically, the case examined concerns the appeal by A.A. against the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Bolzano, which had rejected the claim for declaration of paternity against B.B. and had deemed the evidence presented by the appellant inadequate.

The Issue of Proof and Testimony

One of the crucial points of the judgment concerns the evaluation of the testimony of the appellant's mother, C.C. The Court of Appeal had considered her testimony insufficient, in the absence of further corroboration. However, the Court of Cassation upheld the first ground of appeal, emphasizing that the credibility of testimony cannot be excluded a priori simply because the witness is related to the party. This aspect is of fundamental importance, as it highlights how testimonial evidence, particularly in family matters, should be evaluated with broader criteria than those applied by the Court of Appeal.

The capacity to testify differs from the assessment of the witness's credibility, as these operate on different planes.

Circumstantial Evidence and Parental Responsibilities

The Court of Cassation reiterated that awareness of parenthood can be inferred from unambiguous circumstantial evidence, such as having had unprotected sexual intercourse during the period of conception. Furthermore, the judgment clarifies that a claim for damages arising from the violation of a child's rights presupposes the existence of intent or negligence on the part of the parent. The Court therefore criticized the Court of Appeal's decision to consider certain circumstantial elements as neutral, emphasizing that each piece of circumstantial evidence, although seemingly insignificant in isolation, can acquire probative value when considered in conjunction with other elements.

• The mother's testimony cannot be excluded due to kinship ties.
• Awareness of paternity can emerge from circumstantial evidence and behavior.
• The evaluation of circumstantial evidence must be comprehensive and not atomistic.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 34950 of 2022 represents a significant step forward in the recognition of children's rights and parental responsibility. It underscores the need for a more flexible approach in evaluating evidence in family matters, recognizing the value of testimony and circumstantial evidence in establishing judicial truth. The Court of Cassation, by upholding the appellant's grounds, has paved the way for a new evaluation by the Court of Appeal, emphasizing the protection of minors' rights and the importance of adequate parental responsibility.