Medical Liability and Damages: Ruling No. 1671 of 2023 by the Court of Appeal of Palermo

Ruling No. 1671 of September 28, 2023, by the Court of Appeal of Palermo falls within a highly relevant legal context concerning the liability of healthcare facilities and the issue of proof in cases of patient harm. The Court upheld the appeal of two sisters, G.D. and G.G., against a healthcare facility, recognizing its liability for the death of their mother, G.F., which occurred following inadequate medical treatment.

Facts of the Case and First Instance Decision

In the first instance, the Court of Agrigento had rejected the claims for damages, holding that there was insufficient proof of the facility's liability. However, the appellants contested this decision, highlighting deficiencies in clinical documentation and treatment management, which could have contributed to the patient's death.

The Court ruled that, given the initial burden of proof on the appellants, the healthcare facility has the obligation to demonstrate that it took all necessary measures to prevent hospital-acquired infections.

The Role of Evidence and Documentation Deficiencies

The Court, in assessing the healthcare facility's liability, emphasized how the lack of information in the medical records negatively impacted the ability to reconstruct the correct therapeutic process. Experts pointed out that insufficient documentation can itself constitute evidence of the facility's negligence.

• The correct recording of treatments and procedures adopted is fundamental to demonstrating adherence to the leges artis (standards of practice).
• In the absence of such documentation, the facility cannot evade liability and must demonstrate the adoption of preventive measures.
• Jurisprudence has established that, in cases of hospital-acquired infections, the patient bears the burden of proving liability, but it is incumbent upon the facility to demonstrate the absence of fault.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the ruling by the Court of Appeal of Palermo represents a significant affirmation of patients' rights, highlighting the crucial role of clinical documentation and proper treatment management. The Court recognized non-pecuniary damages, quantified as a loss of chance of survival, estimated between 30% and 40%, to be compensated to the plaintiffs. The judgment underscores that, for healthcare facilities, it is essential to ensure maximum transparency and correctness in clinical management, not only to protect their professionals but, above all, to safeguard patients' health.