Analysis of Judgment Cass. civ. no. 14362/2019: Compensation for Pecuniary Damage and Compensatio Lucri cum Damno

Judgment no. 14362 of 2019 by the Court of Cassation represents an important reference point in matters of damages and civil liability, particularly concerning the quantification of pecuniary damages arising from a fatal road accident. In this article, we will explore the key points of the decision, analyzing the legal implications and the provisions cited by the Court.

Context of the Judgment

The case in question concerned the appeal filed by M. P. and others against Generali Business Solutions S.C.p.A. and Van Service S.r.l., seeking rejection of the claim for pecuniary damages for lost profits following the death of a relative in a road accident. The Court of Appeal of Messina had already dismissed the claim, highlighting that INAIL had paid annuities to the deceased's relatives, which, according to the Court, excluded the right to compensation.

The central issue concerns the possibility of cumulating compensation for pecuniary damage with INAIL annuities, in light of the principle of compensatio lucri cum damno.

The Principle of Compensatio Lucri cum Damno

The Court of Cassation reiterated the importance of the principle of compensatio lucri cum damno, which prevents the duplication of compensation for the same damage. In the specific case, the appellants argued that the damage for lost profits should be compensated independently of INAIL annuities, as the latter constituted a social security obligation and not compensation for the damage suffered.

• The first ground of appeal concerned the violation of articles 143, 1223, 1226, and 2056 of the Italian Civil Code, contesting the Court of Appeal's decision not to recognize pecuniary damage.
• The second ground sought to demonstrate that, even accepting the principle of compensation, a right to compensation remained for the difference between the amount of the annuities and the actual damage.

The Court's Conclusions

The Court rejected the main appeal, stating that the sums received as INAIL annuities must be deducted from the requested compensation to avoid unjust enrichment. It also reiterated that, in situations of fatal accidents, the victim's relatives can rely on a dual form of protection: that provided by INAIL and that arising from civil liability for the damage suffered.

Conclusion

Judgment no. 14362/2019 by the Court of Cassation clarifies the dynamics between damages and social security benefits, highlighting how the principle of compensatio lucri cum damno applies to avoid duplication. The decision reinforces the concept that social security allowances, such as those from INAIL, do not prejudice the right to compensation for pecuniary damage but must be considered in the final calculation to ensure a fair balance. This aspect is crucial for legal professionals assisting families involved in road accidents, providing them with clear guidance on legal expectations in such situations.