Judgment No. 19850 of 2024: Disavowal of Photographic Copies and Compliance with the Original

Judgment No. 19850, issued by the Court of Cassation on July 18, 2024, addresses a crucial aspect of civil law: the disavowal of the compliance of photographic or photostatic copies with the originals. The ruling highlights the importance of an explicit and unequivocal disavowal by the interested party, with reference to Articles 214 and 215 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Let us analyze in more detail the implications of this decision.

The Legal Context

The Court reiterated that Art. 2719 of the Civil Code requires a clear and specific disavowal of the compliance of the copy with the original. In the absence of such a disavowal, the photostatic copy is considered recognized both in its compliance and in the authenticity of the writing and signature. This principle is fundamental to ensure legal certainty and the stability of documentary evidence in a trial.

Art. 2719 c.c. - Applicability both to the disavowal of the compliance of the copy with its original and to the disavowal of the authenticity of writing or signature - Subjection of both hypotheses to Articles 214 and 215 c.p.c. - Consequences - Case law. Art. 2719 c.c. - which requires an express disavowal of the compliance with the original of photographic or photostatic copies - is applicable both to the case of disavowal of the compliance of the copy with its original and to that of disavowal of the authenticity of writing or signature, and both hypotheses are governed by Articles 214 and 215 c.p.c., with the consequence that the unauthenticated photostatic copy is deemed recognized, both in its compliance with the original and in the writing and signature of its author, if the appearing party does not disavow it in a specific and unequivocal manner at the first hearing or in the first response following its production; this effect occurs even when one or more heirs do not declare within such terms - in a ritual, clear, and unequivocal manner - that they do not recognize them. (In this case, the S.C. annulled the judgment on the merits that had deemed sufficient the disavowal made by the heir who had limited himself to stating that he "harbored strong doubts" about the authenticity of the contested private writings even if produced only in photocopy and did not exclude the possibility that they had been composed and signed by the apparent signatory for the purpose of family reconciliation).

The Implications of the Judgment

This judgment has significant consequences for the parties involved in legal disputes. In particular, if an heir or a party in the case does not disavow the submitted copies clearly and specifically, these are considered valid and recognized. It is therefore essential to pay attention to the methods of disavowing documentary evidence, as a lax approach may result in the loss of rights.

  • Importance of an explicit disavowal
  • Legal consequences of non-disavowal
  • Key regulatory references

Conclusions

Judgment No. 19850 of 2024 represents an important clarification on the issue of disavowal of photostatic copies. The Court of Cassation emphasized the necessity of an unequivocal and timely disavowal, highlighting the fundamental role of clarity in civil proceedings. Parties involved in legal cases must be aware of these dynamics to adequately protect their rights and interests.

Bianucci Law Firm