Supreme Court, Labor Section, Order No. 10043/2024: Reflections on Evidence and Employment Liability
The recent order No. 10043 of the Supreme Court, issued on April 15, 2024, offers an important opportunity for reflection on the employer's liability and the burden of proof in cases of occupational diseases. In particular, the Court ruled on a case involving a worker who contracted hepatitis C following a workplace accident, highlighting fundamental aspects related to the evaluation of documentary evidence and contractual liability.
The Circumstances of the Case
In the case examined, the appellant, A.A., had sued the Calabria Region, the successor of ASL 2 of Castrovillari, for damages incurred due to an infection contracted during service. The Court of Appeal of Catanzaro had initially rejected the request, deeming the evidence provided by the worker insufficient, as he had failed to adequately demonstrate the causal link between the accident and the illness.
The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence, rather than a partial selection.
The Judgment of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, accepting the appeal, highlighted that the Court of Appeal had failed to consider a series of crucial documents that could have supported the appellant's claims. In particular, the Court reiterated that it is essential, in labor proceedings, for the judge to exercise his or her investigative powers ex officio to ensure effective protection of the right to defense. The decision brought to light the principle that, in the employment context, the causal link between illness and work activity must be evaluated with a less rigid approach, taking into account all available evidentiary elements.
Implications of the Ruling
This ruling has significant implications for both workers and employers. Among the key points that emerged, we can highlight:
- The judge's duty to evaluate the evidence comprehensively and not limit themselves to considering only the strong evidence.
- The importance of adequately demonstrating the causal link, but also the recognition that circumstantial evidence can have significant value.
- The principle of reversing the burden of proof in cases of recognition of service-related causes, which can significantly influence liability judgments.
Conclusion
The ruling No. 10043/2024 of the Supreme Court represents an important intervention in the management of evidence within the employment context, emphasizing the need for a flexible and fair interpretation of existing regulations. This not only protects workers' rights but also promotes a safer and more responsible work environment on the part of employers. In an era where occupational diseases are increasingly recognized, the jurisprudence must adapt to ensure justice and equity.
