Analysis of Ruling Order No. 1986 of 2025: Apparent Reasoning and Legal Consequences

The recent Order No. 1986 of 2025, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers significant food for thought regarding the validity of the reasoning in judgments. In particular, the Court annulled a decision of the Court of Appeal of Milan for defects in reasoning, stating that the reasoning provided was merely apparent and therefore inadequate to guarantee a fair trial.

The Case and the Court's Arguments

In the case examined, P. appealed the decision of the Court of Appeal, which had not provided an adequate critical review of the respondent's arguments, M. Furthermore, the judgment in question did not clearly indicate the criteria used for the increase of the divorce allowance. The Court of Cassation highlighted that the reasoning must be sufficiently clear and understandable to allow the parties involved to comprehend the logical path followed by the judge.

The reasoning is merely apparent, and the judgment is void because it is affected by an error in procedure, when, although graphically existing, it does not make the basis of the decision perceptible, because it contains arguments objectively unsuitable for conveying the reasoning followed by the judge in forming their conviction, as the interpreter cannot be left to supplement it with the most varied, hypothetical conjectures. (In this case, the Supreme Court quashed with referral the decision containing reasoning based on the verbatim reproduction of the appeal brief, in the absence of any critical review of the logical path followed to dismiss the appellant's arguments and, furthermore, without indicating the criterion followed for the increase of the divorce allowance, the amount of which was indicated solely in the operative part).

Implications of the Ruling

This ruling highlights several crucial aspects of Italian jurisprudence, particularly regarding the respect for the right to defense and the need for adequate reasoning. The consequences of apparent reasoning are significant and can lead not only to the annulment of the judgment but also to delays in proceedings and an increase in legal costs for the parties involved.

• Recognition of the right to adequate reasoning.
• Possibility of appeals in case of inadequate reasoning.
• Impact on divorce allowance assignment proceedings.

Conclusions

The Court of Cassation, with Order No. 1986 of 2025, has reiterated the importance of clear and understandable reasoning as an essential element for ensuring justice and respecting the rights of the parties involved. The ruling represents an important reminder for judges and lawyers, emphasizing that inadequate reasoning not only compromises the decision-making process but also undermines confidence in the legal system. It is essential that legal decisions are supported by solid and coherent arguments, so that a fair trial can be guaranteed for all.