Disclaimer of Paternity: The Court of Cassation Clarifies the Balance Between Biological Truth and the Minor's Interest (Judgment no. 5219/2024)

The recent ordinance of the Court of Cassation, no. 5219 of February 27, 2024, touches upon a sensitive and socially significant issue: the disclaimer of paternity. In this context, the Court was required to balance the right to biological truth with the superior interest of the minor, a topic that has raised and will continue to raise debates and reflections in courtrooms and Italian families.

The Case Under Review and Previous Decisions

The case originated from an appeal filed by the Special Guardian of the minor D.D., which led to the declaration of disclaimer of paternity of B.B. towards the minor. The Court of Appeal of Perugia had initially rejected the appeal filed by B.B. and A.A., confirming the legitimacy of the appointment of the special guardian and the adequacy of the investigations conducted. However, the appellants challenged the decision, arguing that the minor's situation and interest had not been adequately considered.

The balance between the right to personal identity linked to the affirmation of biological truth and the interest in the certainty of "status" and the stability of family relationships is fundamental in these delicate matters.

The Principle of Law Stated by the Court

The Court reiterated a fundamental principle: it is not sufficient to assert the favor veritatis (favoring the truth) without considering the effects that the disclaimer of paternity could have on the minor. This means that the child's right to personal identity must be considered in relation to the affective and personal bonds already established, particularly when dealing with a minor under twelve years of age. Therefore, an approach that balances these interests is necessary, avoiding the sacrifice of one in favor of the other.

The Court of Appeal's Omissions

The Court of Cassation upheld the grounds of appeal concerning the omission of investigations into the minor's actual interest and the necessity of hearing her. The minor's hearing, in fact, is considered a necessary fulfillment and cannot be substituted by other forms of investigation. The lack of an accurate examination regarding the minor's interest led to the annulment of the appealed judgment, emphasizing the importance of considering her emotional and psychological needs.

• The necessity of a balance between biological truth and the minor's interest.
• The centrality of the minor's hearing in decisions concerning her.
• The role of the special guardian in protecting the minor's interests.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment no. 5219/2024 of the Court of Cassation represents an important step forward in protecting the rights of minors, highlighting the need for a balanced approach that considers both the right to truth and the superior interest of the minor. This ruling not only clarifies the legal principles regarding the disclaimer of paternity but also offers food for thought for future cases involving the delicacy of family relationships and the identity of the youngest.