Medical Liability and Damages: Judgment No. 1671 of 2023 by the Court of Appeal of Palermo
The judgment No. 1671 of September 28, 2023, by the Court of Appeal of Palermo fits into a highly relevant legal context regarding the liability of healthcare facilities and the issue of proof in cases of damages suffered by patients. The Court upheld the appeal of two sisters, G.D. and G.G., against a healthcare facility, recognizing its liability for the death of their mother, G.F., which occurred following inadequate medical intervention.
Case Facts and First Instance Decision
At first instance, the Agrigento Court had rejected the claims for damages, considering that there was insufficient evidence of the facility's liability. However, the appellants contested this decision, highlighting deficiencies in the clinical documentation and management of therapies that may have contributed to the patient's death.
The Court established that, in light of the initial evidentiary burden on the appellants, the healthcare facility has the obligation to demonstrate that it adopted all necessary measures to prevent nosocomial infections.
The Role of Evidence and Documentation Deficiencies
In assessing the liability of the healthcare facility, the Court emphasized how the lack of information in the medical records negatively impacted the ability to reconstruct the correct therapeutic process. Experts pointed out that insufficient documentation can in itself constitute evidence of the facility's negligence.
- The accurate recording of therapies and procedures adopted is crucial to demonstrate compliance with leges artis.
- In the absence of such documentation, the facility cannot evade responsibility and must demonstrate the adoption of preventive measures.
- Case law has established that, in cases of nosocomial infections, the patient has the burden of proving liability, but it is up to the facility to demonstrate the absence of fault.
Conclusions
In conclusion, the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Palermo represents an important affirmation of patients' rights, highlighting the crucial role of clinical documentation and proper management of therapies. The Court recognized a non-economic damage, quantified as the loss of chance of survival, estimated between 30% and 40%, to be compensated to the plaintiffs. The ruling underscores that, for healthcare facilities, it is essential to ensure maximum transparency and correctness in clinical management, not only to protect their professionals but, above all, to safeguard patients' health.
