Disavowal of Paternity and Genetic Evidence: Reflections on the Judgment of Cass. civ., Sez. I, Ord. n. 30749/2024

The judgment n. 30749/2024 of the Court of Cassation, issued on November 29, 2024, addresses a matter of significant importance in family law: the disavowal of paternity and the validity of genetic evidence in such contexts. The decision is based on a complex case where family dynamics, evidence, and timing played a crucial role.

The Case and the Court's Decision

The appeal originates from a ruling of the Court of Termini Imerese, which had rejected the disavowal of paternity action brought by E.E. against his children, B.B. and D.D. The Court deemed that the action had been brought beyond the statute of limitations set forth in Article 244, paragraph 2 of the Civil Code, in force at the time of the request. However, the Court of Appeal of Palermo upheld E.E.'s appeal, declaring that the children were not born during the marriage with A.A.

The Court of Appeal considered that the refusal to undergo genetic testing constituted a relevant piece of evidence in the disavowal of paternity.

Genetic Evidence and the Role of Refusal

A central aspect of the ruling concerns the issue of genetic testing. The Court stated that, following the ruling of the Constitutional Court n. 266 of 2006, blood-genetic testing has become the primary evidence in actions for disavowal of paternity. In this case, both B.B. and D.D. opposed their refusal to undergo the test, a behavior that, although not coercible, was regarded by the Court as a piece of evidence supporting the disavowal.

It is interesting to note how the Court balanced the favor veritatis, that is, the preference for substantive truth, with respect for the will of minors. Indeed, the testimonies of the children highlighted their desire to maintain a distance from the father, which influenced the final decision.

• The refusal to undergo genetic testing can be assessed as evidence.
• The testimonies of the children were fundamental to the decision.
• The Court reiterated the importance of considering the emotional and relational context in which the evidence is presented.

Conclusions

The ruling of the Court of Cassation represents an important step forward in the jurisprudence regarding disavowal of paternity. It emphasizes how genetic evidence can significantly influence paternity decisions, but also stresses the importance of considering family dynamics and the emotions of the minors involved. In a legal context that is often complex and delicate, the ability to balance the pursuit of truth with respect for family relationships becomes crucial.