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

Analysis of the Judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 200/2021: Medical Responsibility and the Right to Defense

The judgment No. 200 of 2021 of the Court of Cassation represents an important step forward in defining medical responsibility and protecting patients' rights. In this case, Mr. L.P.F. had filed an appeal against the USL of Teramo, complaining of an incorrect diagnosis of a cerebral aneurysm by the emergency room doctors. The Court of Cassation accepted the appeal, highlighting how the issue of diagnostic difficulty could not be raised ex officio without ensuring a fair hearing between the parties.

The Case and the Court's Decision

The appellant, L.P.F., had been discharged from the hospital without further diagnostic investigations, only to be urgently readmitted the following day. The Court of Appeal had initially rejected the claim for damages, considering that the healthcare professionals had not committed grave fault, as the case presented particular technical difficulties. However, the Cassation Court emphasized the importance of respecting the right to a fair hearing, stating that assessments regarding levels of diagnostic difficulty must be discussed in court and cannot be unilaterally imposed by the judge.

The respect for the right to a fair hearing and the right to defense is indeed an inherent principle of the legal system.

Relevant Legal Principles

The Court recalled several legal principles, including:

  • The right to defense guaranteed by Article 24 of the Constitution;
  • The principle of non-contestation, which establishes that one party cannot deny a fact that the other party has proven;
  • The necessity for adequate reasoning by the judge when deviating from the conclusions of a technical advisory report (CTU).

These principles, although already established in Italian case law, were strongly reiterated in the judgment under review, highlighting the importance of a correct evaluation of evidence and the respect for the rights of the parties involved.

Conclusions

The judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 200/2021 represents an important reminder of the significance of a fair hearing and the correct assessment of evidence in the healthcare field. The responsibility of doctors cannot be evaluated abstractly but must take into account the specificities of the case and the evidence presented. This decision not only reaffirms the rights of patients but also encourages healthcare professionals to always ensure maximum transparency and diligence in their work.