Civil Liability in Road Traffic: Analysis of Cass. Civ., Section VI - 3, Order no. 3764 of 2021

The recent order of the Court of Cassation, no. 3764 of 2021, offers important insights into the dynamics of civil liability in the event of road accidents. The ruling focuses on a case where a hit-and-run vehicle caused damages, leaving the injured party responsible for proving their innocence. The Court had to examine the presumption of fault provided for by art. 2054 of the Italian Civil Code (c.c.) and the consequences for compensation of damages.

The Specific Case and the Court's Decision

F. G. had sued Fondiaria Assicurazioni S.p.A. seeking compensation for damages suffered as a result of a road accident caused by an unknown vehicle. Initially, the Court of Teramo had rejected the claim, stating that sufficient proof of the hit-and-run vehicle's liability had not been provided. However, on appeal, the Court partially upheld the appeal, finding elements of shared liability to exist.

The presumption of equal fault in causing a road accident is also applicable to vehicles involved in the accident but not directly colliding.

Legal Issues Raised

The Court of Cassation examined three grounds of appeal, focusing particularly on the correct application of art. 2054 c.c. and the need to distinguish between biological damage and moral damage. The key points emerging from the ruling include:

• The presumption of liability is extendable even in the absence of direct collision between vehicles, provided that a causal contribution from the other party is demonstrated.
• Compensation for damages must also consider the personalization of moral damage, not just biological damage.
• The Court noted the omission to rule on the request for reimbursement of medical expenses, highlighting the plaintiff's right to full compensation.

Conclusions

The Cassation ruling emphasizes the importance of proof in civil liability for road accidents. It clarifies that the presumption of fault must be applied carefully, taking into account the specificity of each case. Furthermore, the decision to uphold the second and third grounds of appeal highlights the need to ensure adequate and complete compensation for accident victims. The Court therefore referred the case back to the Court of Appeal of L'Aquila for a new evaluation, stressing the importance of a thorough analysis of the compensation claims.