Burden of Proof in Negative Credit Declaration Action: Analysis of Ordinance No. 9706 of 2024

Recently, the Court of Cassation, with ordinance No. 9706 of April 10, 2024, addressed the issue of the burden of proof in the context of negative credit declaration actions. This decision proves crucial for understanding the responsibilities of the creditor and the consequences arising from the failure to demonstrate the constitutive facts of their right. The ordinance in question not only clarifies the applicability of Article 2697 of the Civil Code but also offers insights into how the parties should behave in litigation.

General Principles on the Burden of Proof

Article 2697 of the Civil Code establishes the general rule regarding the distribution of the burden of proof, which is applicable to all legal actions, including negative credit declaration actions. Essentially, it is up to the creditor to prove the existence of their right, even when facing a negative declaration action. The Court of Cassation, in ordinance No. 9706, reiterated that the lack of evidence from the creditor leads to the rejection of their claim.

Distribution of evidentiary burdens - Nature of the action taken - Relevance - Exclusion - Negative credit declaration action - Consequences of failing to demonstrate the constitutive elements of the credit claim - On the creditor - Existence - Case. The general rule on the distribution of the burden of proof as per Article 2697 of the Civil Code is applicable regardless of the nature of the action taken, with the consequence that, even in the case of a negative credit declaration claim, the burden of proving the constitutive facts of their right falls on the claimant asserting to be a creditor. (In this case, the Supreme Court annulled the appealed judgment which had rejected the negative declaration claim, considering the radical contestation by the claimant of the allegations of the alleged creditor to be insignificant, despite the documentation produced by the latter being insufficient to prove either the contractual title of the claim or the fulfillment of the obligation).

The Specific Case and Its Implications

In the case examined, the Court of Cassation annulled the decision of the Court of Appeal of Milan, which had rejected the negative credit declaration claim. This decision was made despite the radical contestation by the claimant of the claims of the alleged creditor, thus highlighting the importance of adequate proof from the party asserting a credit. The documentation presented by the alleged creditor was found insufficient to prove either the contractual title or the fulfillment of the obligation, effectively leading to the need to reconsider the creditor's position.

Conclusions

The judgment commented on represents an important reminder of the creditor's responsibility to demonstrate their claim, even in a negative declaration action. It is essential that creditors are aware of the legal implications of their actions and the importance of providing concrete and sufficient evidence to support their claims. This ordinance not only confirms the principles established by current regulations but also serves as a warning for those who undertake legal actions without a solid evidentiary basis.

Bianucci Law Firm