The recent ruling of the Court of Cassation, n. 25849 of 2021, provides important clarifications regarding insurance coverage for damages caused by domestic animals. In particular, the case examined highlighted the interpretative difficulties related to the exclusion clauses of insurance policies, especially in relationships between family members. The decision focuses on an incident in which the appellant, T.R., was injured by her son’s dog, S.C., and the consequent exclusion of insurance coverage by Helvetia Swiss Insurance Company.
In this case, T.R. suffered damages following the incident caused by her son’s dog. The insurance company refused compensation, arguing that damages inflicted on non-cohabiting parents were not covered by the policy. The Court of Appeal of Rome upheld this interpretation, stating that the exclusion clause applied regardless of cohabitation. However, T.R. appealed this decision, arguing that the exclusion only concerned cohabiting relatives.
The Court of Cassation, reviewing the appeal, emphasized the importance of a clear and unambiguous interpretation of insurance clauses. It pointed out that, according to the principle of contra stipulatorem interpretation, in cases of ambiguity, the meaning of the clause must be interpreted in favor of the non-drafting party. The Court noted that the wording of the clause was not unequivocal and that cohabitation could not be considered an exclusive requirement for parents. Furthermore, it highlighted that the rationale behind the exclusion clause was linked to the higher likelihood of damage resulting from cohabitation, not from the family relationship itself.
The Court emphasized that the interpretation of insurance clauses must take into account clarity and comprehensibility, avoiding the attribution of ambiguous meanings without clear justification.
The decision of the Court of Cassation has important implications for the management of insurance policies and for the rights of the injured parties. For family members, in particular, it is essential to understand that exclusions of coverage cannot be applied indiscriminately, but must be interpreted based on the context and rationale of the clause. This ruling represents a step forward in the protection of the rights of the injured parties, reaffirming the importance of a fair and correct interpretation of contractual provisions.
We constantly follow regulatory and jurisprudential developments, offering updated analyses and innovative solutions. We share legal developments to foster a more informed legal culture.
abusiveness Accident accident prevention law accidents accountant acoustic emissions active legitimacy adversarial process airbag alternative medicine ANAS art. 141 Insurance Code art. 2051 art. 2051 c.c. article 2087 civil code asbestos asbestos exposure ASL liability assignment of credit atypical evidence biological damage birth injuries birth injury blood transfusion blood transfusions bodily injury burden of proof Capital Rome case law case_law Cassation Cassation ruling Catanzaro court catastrophic damage causal link causation childbirth civil law civil liability civil trial claim report claims made claims made clause claims made clauses clauses claims made cohabitation compensatio lucri cum damno compensation compensation action compensation for damages compensation tables compulsory treatment congenital malformations Consob Consumer Code contagion contract law contracts contractual interpretation contractual liability corporate liability cosmetics Court of Appeal Court of Cassation Court of Cassation 19744/2014 Covid-19 crime victims criminal law criminal liability custodial liability custody damage assessment damage compensation damage evidence damage from loss of chance damages damages assessment damages compensation death defamation deservingness diagnostic error diagnostic errors differential damage disability disability insurance discrimination dismissal documentary evidence Down syndrome emotional bond emotional bonds employer liability employer_liability equality equity European directive European law evidence failure to supervise family law flight delays food law force majeure fortuitous event guard rail guardrail guidelines gynecologist hazardous activities HCV health law healthcare liability heating systems heirs hepatitis C virus highways HIV hospital liability human rights I.N.A.I.L. iatrogenic damage iatrogenic injury inadmissible appeal INAIL income tax indemnity indemnity law infected blood informed consent injury from fall insult insurance insurance compensation insurance coverage insurance law insurance policies insurance policy intentional injuries intoxication Italian jurisprudence Italian laws joint liability judgment judgment 3767/2018 jurisdiction jurisprudence justice labor law landlord liability law law 194 legal expenses Legislative Decree 81/2008 legitimate reliance liability liability of public entities liability of the Ministry of Health liability of the Municipality liability of the Public Administration loss of chance Lyell syndrome maintenance of public works malpractice manufacturer Marche Region medical error medical expenses medical liability medical malpractice medical negligence medical record melanoma merit mesothelioma Milan Court Milan ruling Ministry of Health Ministry of Justice minors mobbing monetary penalty moped moral damage municipal liability Municipality Municipality of Gragnano Naples negligent arson newborn noise emissions non-contractual liability non-economic damage non-economic damages non-economic_damage non-pecuniary damage nosocomial infection nosocomial infections notification nullity of contract oath occupational disease occupational diseases occupational health package travel parental damage parental liability parental supervision passenger liability passenger rights passengers paving payment notices pension personal injuries personal injury personalization pets Pinto law premature birth prescription price revision procurement professional liability property rights psychological suffering public administration public entities public entity public entity liability public liability public responsibility public safety public works reasoning of the judgment refusal of transfusion regional law regional legislation Regulation EC 261/2004 remedy responsibility of the Ministry of Health Revenue Agency right to compensation right to defense right to health right to honor right to life right to report right to rest right to self-determination road accident road accidents road anomalies road damages road maintenance road potholes road traffic road traffic accidents Rome Capital ruling ruling 1361/2014 ruling 2007 ruling 2023 ruling 5947 ruling 9140 ruling Court of Naples safety safety of systems safety regulations sale of goods school law self-determination seller settlement state liability statute of limitations stray animals stray dogs strepitus fori substitution Supreme Court Supreme Court 2023 Supreme Court 2024 Supreme Court ruling Supreme Court ruling 2023 surgical intervention survivor's pension survivors' pension tax law taxation technical consultancy technical consulting technical liability testimonial evidence tort liability traffic accident traffic regulations TSO unjust damage unjust detention unlawful occupation usufruct VAT water damage weather events wildlife witness evidence witness testimony Work work environment work-related liability. work-related stress worker health workers' rights workplace accident workplace accidents workplace injuries workplace safety wrongful detention