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

Healthcare Liability and Causality: Analysis of the Cass. civ. n. 15991 of 2011

The judgment n. 15991 of 2011 by the Court of Cassation provides an important reflection on liability in the healthcare field, particularly regarding the assessment of causality in cases of harm suffered by patients. In this case, the parents of a newborn requested compensation for damages suffered due to alleged medical errors during childbirth, raising the issue of the responsibility of healthcare professionals and the causal link between the conduct of the medical staff and the harmful event.

The Context of the Judgment

In this specific case, the spouses C. and T. sued the General House of Fatebenefratelli for the damages suffered by their child, who was recognized with a permanent disability of 100%. The court in Rome had accepted the request for compensation, but the decision was contested by the General House, leading the case to appeal and subsequently to the Court of Cassation.

Principles of Civil Liability and Causality

The Court analyzed several aspects of civil liability, emphasizing that, to ascertain the liability of healthcare professionals, it is essential to demonstrate the causal link between their conduct and the harmful event. In particular, the judgment reiterates that the judge must consider all factors, including the pre-existing conditions of the patient, without falling into a logic of fractional liability.

The presence of natural causes that may exclude the action of the damaging party must be evaluated rigorously, avoiding attributing liability based on equitable criteria.

Conclusions and Practical Implications

The judgment Cass. n. 15991 of 2011 marks a firm point in the jurisprudence on medical liability, clarifying that the assessment of the causal link cannot occur through an equitable or proportional criterion. Judges must carefully analyze the evidence and circumstances of the specific case, ensuring that liability is ascertained clearly and precisely. This approach not only protects the rights of the harmed but also promotes more responsible behavior among healthcare professionals.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the judgment in question offers significant insights into the responsibility of healthcare professionals, highlighting the importance of a rigorous analysis of causality in cases of harm. It is essential that healthcare professionals understand the implications of their actions and that patients are adequately protected.