Analysis of Judgment No. 23325 of 2024: Erroneous Indication by the Social Security Institution and Damages Compensation

Judgment No. 23325 of August 29, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers important food for thought in the field of social security law. In particular, the ruling addresses the issue of erroneous indication by a social security institution regarding the deadlines for filing a judicial appeal. This aspect is of fundamental importance for insured individuals, who may face detrimental consequences due to inaccurate information provided by the competent bodies.

Context of the Judgment

In the dispute examined, the insured individual Z. was denied a right due to incorrect communication from the social security institution, which had provided inaccurate information regarding the deadline to appeal a rejection decision. The Court of Cassation, in evaluating the case, established that the responsibility for the communication error lies with the institution, but also clarified that the assessment of the compensability of damages must be carried out by the lower court judge.

Headnote of the Judgment

Erroneous indication by the social security institution of the deadline for filing a judicial appeal - Resulting damage for the insured - Prerequisites - Relative assessment - Competence of the lower court judge - Reviewability by the Court of Cassation - Limits. In the event that a social security institution has provided the insured with erroneous information on the deadline for filing a judicial appeal, the assessment of the existence of the prerequisites for compensation of damages resulting from the failure to appeal the rejection decision within the deadlines prescribed by law - which consist in the ascertainment of the institution's erroneous communication, the excusable nature of the error caused by the communication, and the causal link between the error and the expiry of the deadline - constitutes a finding of fact, which falls exclusively within the competence of the lower court judge, reviewable in cassation only within the limits set forth in art. 360, paragraph 1, no. 5, of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Practical Implications of the Judgment

This ruling introduces some important principles that deserve further exploration:

• The responsibility of the social security institution for erroneous communications is confirmed, but the burden of proof lies with the insured.
• The lower court judge is solely competent to assess the existence of the prerequisites for compensation, limiting the intervention of the Court of Cassation to specific cases.
• The excusable nature of the error must be taken into consideration, influencing the final decision on compensation.

These considerations are fundamental not only for the case at hand but also for the broader legal landscape, as they define the limits and responsibilities of social security institutions towards insured individuals.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 23325 of 2024 represents a milestone in Italian social security law. It clarifies that erroneous information provided by social security institutions can have significant consequences for insured individuals, but also emphasizes the need for careful assessment by the lower court judge. This ruling encourages insured individuals to be vigilant and proactive in managing their social security matters, always keeping in mind the rights and duties involved.