The Importance of the Distinction Between Dolus Causam Dans and Dolus Incidens: Analysis of Ordinance No. 17988 of 2024

The recent Ordinance No. 17988 of July 1, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, represents an important clarification regarding the annulment of contracts due to defects in consent. In particular, the ruling focuses on the distinction between dolus causam dans and dolus incidens, two fundamental concepts in Italian civil law that influence the validity and effectiveness of contracts.

The Legal Context

The issue addressed by the Court originates from Article 1439 of the Civil Code, which establishes that a contract can be annulled if concluded under the influence of deceit. However, the ruling clarifies that not all defects in consent lead to the annulment of the contract. In fact, dolus causam dans is what determines the willingness to contract, while dolus incidens concerns defects that influence contractual conditions without compromising fundamental consent.

  • Dolus causam dans: without it, the contract would not have been concluded.
  • Dolus incidens: influences aspects such as price, but does not determine the annulment of the contract.
Annulment of the contract - Dolus causam dans and dolus incidens - Distinction - Consequences. In terms of contract annulment, pursuant to the combined provisions of Articles 1439 and 1440 of the Civil Code, dolus causam dans, without which the other party would not have contracted, is distinguished from dolus incidens, which influences the conditions of contracting, without being decisive for consent and does not entail the invalidity of the contract, but may only lead to compensation for damages, so that, in the case of deceit affecting only the quantification of the price, the sales contract cannot be annulled.

The Practical Consequences of the Ruling

This distinction has significant repercussions in the world of contracts. In fact, if a contract is affected by dolus causam dans, the parties involved have the right to request its annulment. However, if the deceit is limited to influencing the quantification of the price, the contract remains valid and the damaged party can only seek compensation for the damages suffered.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 17988 of 2024 represents a step forward in understanding contractual dynamics and defects in consent. The clarity provided by the Court of Cassation allows legal practitioners to better navigate situations where deceit may be present, ensuring greater protection for contractual parties and better application of civil norms. Staying updated on such developments is essential for anyone working in the legal field.

Bianucci Law Firm