Medical Liability and Damages Compensation: Comment on Cass. Civ. No. 3893/2016

The ruling of the Court of Cassation No. 3893 of 2016 provides a significant insight into the issue of medical liability, particularly regarding the damages suffered by a newborn due to negligence during childbirth. The ruling, which involved the parents of a minor with permanent disability, highlights the importance of a proper assessment of the causal link and the criteria for calculating damages.

The Case Under Review

In this specific case, the parents of the minor C.E., born with a 100% permanent disability due to hypoxia during labor, challenged the ruling of the Court of Appeal of Genoa, which had reduced the amount of pecuniary damages awarded in the first instance. The Court of Appeal justified its decision by stating that the responsibility for the damage should be divided, recognizing a contributing cause in the minor's Down syndrome, which predated the negligent conduct of the medical staff.

Responsibility must be attributed in proportion to what is actually and causally attributable, according to the legal principle established by jurisprudence.

The Legal Principles Established by the Court of Cassation

The Court of Cassation accepted the parents' appeal, emphasizing that the reduction of the compensable damage was unjustified. It pointed out that the negligent conduct of the doctor, which caused the hypoxia, must be considered as an independent and primary cause of the damage, regardless of the Down syndrome. Furthermore, the Court recalled the principle that, in the case of medical liability, compensation must cover the entire damage caused by negligence, without penalizing the injured party for pre-existing conditions.

The Practical Implications of the Ruling

This ruling represents an important affirmation for the rights of victims and clarifies some fundamental points regarding:

  • The determination of the causal link: it is essential to ascertain whether the negligent conduct of the healthcare provider was decisive for the harmful event.
  • The calculation of damages: the assessment of damages must be fair and not penalize the injured party for their pre-existing condition.
  • The proportionality of responsibility: everyone must respond in proportion to what they have actually caused by their behavior.

Conclusions

Ruling No. 3893 of 2016 from the Court of Cassation represents a step forward in the protection of patients' rights and in holding healthcare professionals accountable. It clarifies that, in the event of damage, the assessment must be careful and must not consider pre-existing conditions as a reason to reduce compensation. This approach is essential to ensure fairness and justice, protecting the most vulnerable, such as minors with disabilities.

Bianucci Law Firm