• via Alberto da Giussano, 26, 20145 Milano
  • +39 02 4003 1253
  • info@studiolegalebianucci.it
  • Criminal Lawyer, Family Lawyer, Divorce Lawyer

Professional liability and compensation for damages: analysis of Cass. civ., Sez. III, Ord. n. 25910/2023

The recent ruling of the Court of Cassation, n. 25910 of 2023, offers significant insights regarding professional liability in the healthcare field and the compensation for damages resulting from failed surgical interventions. In particular, the case in question involves a patient, A.A., who suffered severe complications after a mastectomy and breast reconstruction surgery. The Court examined the proper quantification of biological and moral damages, shedding light on crucial aspects of medical liability.

The case of A.A. and the judges' decision

A.A. had sued the University Hospital Company Policlinico, seeking compensation for damages suffered due to postoperative complications. The Court of Modena had initially accepted the request, but the Court of Appeal of Bologna confirmed the decision, reducing the amount of compensation and denying recognition of moral and existential damages. The patient then filed an appeal to the Court of Cassation, raising several grounds for appeal.

The Court highlighted that the assessment of moral damage cannot be automatically excluded from the compensation for biological damage.

The legal issues raised

In her appeal, A.A. complained of violations of procedural and substantive rules concerning the quantification of the damage. The Court accepted the third ground, related to the failure to compensate for moral damage, emphasizing that inner suffering must be evaluated separately. Furthermore, the Court pointed out that the injury to the psychological and physical integrity of the appellant could lead to a presumption of moral damage, which could not be ignored.

  • The Court confirmed that the assessment of non-pecuniary damage must be comprehensive.
  • The importance of proving the loss of economic opportunities was emphasized.
  • The issue of proving moral damage must be addressed rigorously, taking into account the documentary evidence.

Conclusions

The decision of the Court of Cassation represents an important precedent in the field of professional liability and compensation for damages. It reaffirms the importance of a comprehensive assessment of the prejudices suffered by the victim, highlighting that moral damage must be considered independently of biological damage. The ruling provides useful guidance for both legal professionals and doctors, emphasizing the importance of proper management of postoperative complications and communication with patients.