In the complex Italian legal landscape, the issue of the admissibility of evidence gathered in contexts not strictly procedural is always relevant. The recent ruling no. 25749 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation addresses a crucial point: the nature and admissibility of assessments carried out by insurance companies before criminal proceedings have commenced. This decision offers important insights for legal professionals and anyone involved in cases combining insurance and criminal aspects, outlining clearer boundaries between different investigative activities.

The Crucial Distinction: Insurance Assessment vs. Defense Investigations

The Supreme Court, examining the appeal of the defendant G. Z., quashed without referral the decision of the Court of Appeal of Lecce of September 18, 2024. The central issue was the validity and admissibility, in criminal proceedings, of assessments conducted by an insurance company. In the event of a claim, the insurance company initiates its own investigations to establish the facts and the validity of the compensation claim. The question was whether such activities should be considered "preventive defense investigations" (art. 391-novies c.p.p.), and therefore subject to strict procedural guarantees.

Article 391-novies c.p.p. governs "preventive defense investigations," which are activities of searching for and acquiring evidence that a defense counsel may undertake before the commencement of criminal proceedings, to prepare a defense. These investigations are surrounded by precise guarantees of fairness and correctness.

In matters of evidence, the assessment carried out by the insurance company, before the commencement of criminal proceedings, in order to verify the validity of the compensation claim, cannot be considered as an activity of preventive defense investigation, pursuant to art. 391-novies of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as it is a mere technical approfondimento aimed at reconstructing the dynamics of the reported incident, during the execution phase of the insurance contract, and therefore its outcomes are admissible in criminal proceedings, despite the non-observance of the discipline provided for the conduct of defense investigations.

This maxim is of fundamental importance, drawing a clear line of demarcation. The Court, with President E. A. and Rapporteur P. D. N. T., clarified that the insurance company's activity is a "mere technical approfondimento," not aimed at preparing a defense in a criminal trial, but at verifying the extent of the damage for contractual purposes. This means that the outcomes of such assessments – such as expert reports or site inspections – can be legitimately acquired and used in criminal proceedings, even if they have not followed the formalities required for defense investigations (art. 391-novies c.p.p. or art. 327-bis c.p.p.).

Practical Implications and Legal References

The practical implications are significant. If an insurance assessment produced elements useful for reconstructing a crime (e.g., insurance fraud or serious injury), these elements could be introduced into criminal proceedings without the defense being able to object to their inadmissibility due to procedural defects. This is relevant considering that insurance companies, as provided for by art. 148 of the Private Insurance Code (Legislative Decree no. 209/2005), have specific obligations to assess claims.

The decision of the Cassation aligns with previous case law (rulings no. 1731/2018 and no. 13110/2019) that have outlined the distinction between defense investigative activity and other forms of technical assessment. The substantial difference lies in the purpose: defense investigations seek elements in favor of the investigated person/defendant, while insurance assessments are instrumental to contract management and claim settlement. This distinction is crucial for the use of evidence in court.

In summary, ruling 25749/2025 offers us some firm points:

• Assessments by insurance companies, preceding criminal proceedings, are not to be equated with preventive defense investigations.
• Such activity is a "technical approfondimento" for the management of the insurance contract.
• The outcomes of these assessments are fully admissible in criminal proceedings, even without the formalities of defense investigations.
• The purpose of the assessment is the decisive criterion for its legal qualification and the applicability of procedural rules.

Conclusions: A Beacon for Justice and Insurance

Ruling no. 25749 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation represents an important clarification in a complex matter. It offers clear guidance for legal operators, distinguishing the purposes and methods of evidence acquisition in different contexts. For insurance companies, it confirms the validity of their technical assessments, with an attentive eye on their potential admissibility in criminal proceedings. For citizens and lawyers, knowing that such elements can enter criminal proceedings is crucial for a correct evaluation of the evidentiary framework and for effective defense strategies. The clarity of the Supreme Court makes the judicial path more transparent and predictable, ensuring the pursuit of procedural truth without unnecessary formalism.