Assessment of disability and worsening of medical conditions: the burden of proof in Order no. 27354/2025
In the complex procedure for the recognition of social security and welfare benefits related to civil disability, the recourse to the mandatory preventive technical assessment (ATPO) pursuant to art. 445-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure represents a crucial step. Often, during the opposition proceedings, the citizen claims a deterioration in their health conditions, invoking the application of article 149 of the implementing provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, to obtain a renewal of the court-appointed expert witness report (C.T.U.), it is not sufficient to simply file new medical certificates. The Court of Cassation, with the significant order no. 27354 of October 13, 2025, has established precise boundaries regarding the burdens incumbent upon the appellant.
The case and the decision of the Supreme Court
The matter originated from the opposition filed by P. F. against I. C. L. challenging the findings of the preventive technical assessment. The appellant claimed a worsening of their pathological condition, producing supporting medical documentation, but without specifying the concrete impact of the new infirmities on the health requirements necessary for the requested welfare benefit. The Court of Naples North rejected the appeal, a decision subsequently confirmed definitively by the Labour Section of the Court of Cassation.
The judges of legitimacy took the opportunity to reiterate a fundamental principle: social security protection cannot be based on mere generic allegations. Those requesting the renewal of expert investigations must provide the judge with clear, unequivocal, and decisive elements.
The burden of allegation and proof for the new C.T.U.
To fully understand the scope of this ruling, it is useful to analyze the official legal principle expressed by the Court:
The party who, by introducing the proceedings under art. 445-bis, paragraph 6, c.p.c., requests a new court-appointed expert report for the purpose of the assessment under art. 149 disp. att. c.p.c. of the worsening of the disease and of new infirmities that have occurred, has the burden of specifically alleging and proving their existence as well as their decisive relevance, so as to make the decisiveness of the facts deduced with respect to the acceptance of the proposed claim manifest.
This principle highlights how the civil process does not allow for unmotivated explorations. If the appellant intends to assert a worsening that has occurred during the proceedings (as permitted by art. 149 disp. att. c.p.c.), they must fulfill a threefold duty:
- Specific allegation: indicate exactly what the new pathologies are or the evolution of existing ones;
- Proof of existence: produce suitable and temporally relevant medical documentation;
- Demonstration of relevance: explain how such clinical changes affect the disability percentage or working capacity, determining the exceeding of the legal threshold for the desired benefit.
In the present case, the appellant had limited themselves to filing medical certificates without illustrating the causal link and the actual disabling impact with respect to the framework already evaluated by the first court-appointed expert.
Conclusions
The ruling of the Court of Cassation with order no. 27354/2025 sends a clear warning to professionals and claimants. In social security and welfare cases, the production of documents must always be accompanied by a solid technical defense that scientifically and legally illustrates the change in the clinical picture. Relying on the hope that the C.T.U. will discover the disability by examining folders of analyses is not a winning procedural strategy. Only rigorous procedural conduct and the punctual fulfillment of the burden of proof can guarantee the protection of the rights of the most vulnerable citizens.
