Medical Liability: Commentary on Ordinance No. 11137 of 2024 on Damage Compensation

Recently, the Court of Cassation issued Ordinance No. 11137 on April 24, 2024, which provides important clarifications regarding medical liability. This ruling addresses the delicate issue of damage compensation in cases of incorrect medical treatment, particularly when the injury suffered by the patient can be remedied through subsequent surgical intervention. The decision is crucial for understanding how the current legislation, particularly Article 1227, paragraph 2, of the Civil Code, applies in the context of the responsibility of healthcare professionals.

The Legal Context

Under Italian law, medical liability is governed by a set of rules aimed at protecting the patient in cases of damage arising from professional errors. Article 1227, paragraph 2, of the Civil Code stipulates that the injured party must avoid aggravating the damage. However, in Ordinance No. 11137, the Court excluded the applicability of this rule when the damage can be corrected through subsequent intervention. This aspect is fundamental, as it requires reflection on the duty to minimize damage and on objective good faith.

The Ruling of the Judgment

In general, in the context of medical liability, when the injury resulting from incorrect treatment can be remedied with subsequent surgical intervention, the rule of Article 1227, paragraph 2, of the Civil Code is not applicable, because this would impose on the injured party a duty that goes beyond the obligation to avoid aggravation of the damage, the foundation of which lies in the principle of objective good faith, specifically in the duty to safeguard the utility of the counterparty, within the limits of their own personal or economic sacrifice. (In applying this principle, the Supreme Court deemed the judgment that disregarded the claim of the damaging party for compensation corresponding to the value of the lesser biological damage that would have remained following the surgical interventions suitable for partially remedying the aftereffects of the incorrect execution of a surgical operation on the breast and abdomen, combined with the cost of such interventions, to be immune from criticism).

This ruling clarifies the principle that the patient is not obligated to undergo further interventions to avoid aggravating the damage, thereby establishing an important legal precedent. The Court emphasized that imposing such an obligation on the injured party would constitute a violation of the principle of objective good faith, which should also protect the utility of the counterparty.

Impacts and Final Considerations

The consequences of this ruling are significant for both patients and healthcare professionals. On one hand, patients may feel more protected in the event of medical errors, knowing that they are not required to undergo additional procedures to obtain compensation. On the other hand, healthcare professionals must be aware that their responsibility is not limited to the provision of service but must also consider the long-term consequences of their actions.

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 11137 of 2024 represents a significant step towards greater protection for patients and clarifies important aspects of medical liability. It is essential that the actors involved in the healthcare sector understand the importance of this ruling and its implications in the daily practice of the profession.

Bianucci Law Firm