Recognition of Biological Damage and Compensation: Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Cassation, Labor Section, No. 6503 of 2022
The judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 6503 of 2022 is part of a crucial legal debate regarding the compensation for biological damage in the event of a workplace accident. The Court clarified the limits of INAIL's liability and established the methods for the liquidation of non-pecuniary damage for the victim's family members. In this article, we will analyze the main aspects of this ruling, highlighting the implications for the rights of heirs and the responsibilities of the entities involved.
The Context of the Judgment
The case involved the heirs of a worker who died following a workplace accident. The Court of Appeal of Salerno had initially upheld INAIL's appeal, rejecting the heirs' claim for the recognition of additional sums beyond those already liquidated. However, the Court condemned the private parties to compensate for the non-pecuniary damage.
The Decisions of the Court of Cassation
- The Court confirmed that INAIL is not obliged to compensate for temporary biological damage, limiting itself to recognizing indemnities for permanent disability.
- It was emphasized that compensable biological damage exclusively concerns permanent impairments, thus excluding temporary biological damage.
- The Court stated that non-pecuniary damage is compensable only for the suffering endured by the victim before death, considering the time elapsed between the accident and death.
The ruling clarified that the liquidation of terminal biological damage must follow the criteria of the Milan tables, used for the quantification of personal injury damages.
Implications for the Rights of Heirs
The ruling of the Court of Cassation highlights how heirs can seek compensation for non-pecuniary damage, particularly for terminal biological damage and moral damage. However, to obtain compensation, it is essential to prove the existence of damage suffered by the victim during the time interval between the accident and death. This aspect represents a challenge for the heirs, as it requires evidence of the victim's suffering and awareness during that period.
Furthermore, the judgment clarifies that the right to compensation does not transfer iure hereditatis for damages not ascertainable at the time of death, highlighting the limitations of the current insurance system and the need for reform to ensure greater fairness.
Conclusions
The judgment No. 6503 of 2022 of the Court of Cassation represents an important ruling regarding the compensation for biological damage, clarifying the limits of INAIL's responsibilities and the compensation possibilities for the victim's family members. It is essential for heirs to be aware of the necessary conditions for making a compensation claim and the importance of gathering adequate evidence. The issue of compensation for damages in the event of a workplace accident remains complex and deserves careful consideration by the legislator.
