The death of a grandchild in a road accident raises a question for grandparents that goes far beyond grief: does the bond with the grandchild give the right to compensation? The answer can be positive, but pointing out the family relationship is not enough. What counts is the reality of the relationship, how it was lived, and the evidence available to prove it. The lack of cohabitation, in particular, does not automatically close the door to the claim.

I want to clarify what is meant by damages for the loss of a parental relationship, because each grandparent's position is autonomous, what facts make the bond legally relevant, and what function liquidation tables serve. We will also look at the difference between a claim addressed to the insurance company and an action in criminal proceedings, without confusing compensation with the penalty provided for those who caused the accident.

Grandparents' damages are a personal claim

A grandfather or grandmother claims compensation for their own loss. Damages for the loss of a parental relationship concern the suffering and the deprivation of the affectionate, caregiving, and shared relationship that the wrongful act interrupted. It is not a share of the grandchild's inheritance nor a sum to be divided with parents, siblings, or other family members: each relative asserts the harm they have personally suffered.

The offense and the compensation have different functions. Road homicide is governed by Article 589-bis of the Criminal Code, which concerns death caused by the violation of road traffic regulations. The penalty punishes the offender; compensation, on the other hand, aims to compensate, to the extent that money can do so, the consequences suffered by the injured parties.

Family relationship does not create an automatic amount. For a grandparent, it is necessary to link the claim to the actual relationship with the grandchild: frequency of contact, mutual help, presence in important life milestones, assistance, and shared family habits. This does not mean that the relationship must replicate that between parent and child; it means that an actual relationship must emerge, not one merely resulting formally from the family registry certificate.

Any economic loss remains distinct. If the grandchild contributed stably to the grandparent's maintenance or provided economically assessable assistance to them, financial loss may also arise. This is a different item from parental loss damages and requires proof of the lost contribution: it is not presumed simply because a family bond existed.

Cohabitation helps prove the bond, but is not essential

Not living together does not exclude the right to compensation. The Court of Cassation has specified that, in claims for the loss of the parental relationship between grandparents and grandchildren, cohabitation is not a necessary requirement. It can be an important element to show the depth and continuity of the relationship, but those who lived in a different home can equally prove constant relationships of affection and solidarity. The principle is also recalled in order no. 17208 of June 26, 2025, of the Court of Cassation.

The claim changes with the quality of the relationship. A grandparent who accompanied their grandchild to school, cared for them every week, or participated concretely in their upbringing presents a different situation from a relationship limited to rare and undocumented encounters. There is no rigid hierarchy of family feelings, but the judge must be able to reconstruct the real content of the relationship that death broke.

Registered residence is a clue, not the entire proof. If grandparent and grandchild were in the same family registry state, that data can support the reconstruction of shared life. If instead they had different residences, facts showing regular presence become particularly useful: care days, holidays spent together, escorts, frequent contacts, support during an illness or a study phase.

Proof can be built with convergent elements. Registry and civil status certificates serve to prove the relationship, but do not describe the relationship on their own. Testimony from people who knew the family habits, contextualized messages and photographs, documents relating to activities carried out together, school or health communications when they show an effective caregiving role can all take on significance. Every piece of material must be lawfully acquired and must serve to prove specific facts.

Grief must not be turned into artificial proof. A psychological or health path, if genuinely undertaken, can document personal consequences of the loss. However, it is not a necessary condition to prove the existence of parental loss damages. The central point remains the lost relationship and its concrete impact on the life of the grandfather or grandmother.

Which facts make the claim more precise

The facts of the accident must be separated from the facts of the relationship. The dynamics of the accident, the driver's liability, reports, and technical consultations serve to establish whether and to what extent damages must be compensated. The grandparents' position then requires a second level of allegations: not only who the grandchild was, but what they represented in their daily lives.

Continuity is worth more than declared intensity alone. Saying that the grandchild was much loved does not allow one to quantify the damages on its own. It is more useful to explain with verifiable facts whether there were daily phone calls, fixed lunches, assistance with practical chores, even partial cohabitation, mutual help, or family projects already underway. It is not necessary to prove absolute dependence; it is necessary to make a significant relationship recognizable.

Each grandparent must be considered in their own position. Two grandparents may have lived different relationships with the same grandchild. One may have cared for them every afternoon, the other may have maintained an affectionate but more distant relationship due to health, work, or residence reasons. The claim must not flatten these differences: the bond and the prejudice must be set out individually, without presuming that the same sum is due to everyone.

It is useful to keep an orderly reconstruction. Preparing a claim does not require indiscriminate collections of private material. It is more useful to identify a few relevant facts, place them in time, and link them to documents or people who can confirm them. A simple chronology of frequency, care activities, and family occasions helps distinguish what proves the relationship from what merely expresses a memory.

How compensation is determined and what the tables indicate

The tables are not a fixed tariff list. Damages for the loss of the parental relationship are liquidated on an equitable basis: the judge awards a sum by assessing the circumstances of the specific case. The tables serve to make this assessment more consistent and verifiable, not replacing proof of the existence and quality of the relationship between grandparent and grandchild.

Age, cohabitation, and relationship affect the assessment. The Court of Cassation has deemed Milanese tables from June 2022, structured with a variable points system, suitable for damages from the loss of a parental relationship. The parameters recalled by the Court include the age of the victim and of the relative, cohabitation, the presence of other surviving family members, and the quality and intensity of the lost bond. This is clarified by order no. 37009 of December 16, 2022.

Cohabitation does not decide the amount either on its own. Living together can make the demonstration of shared daily life more immediate and affect the assessment, but it does not automatically establish either the right or the extent of compensation. Similarly, the absence of cohabitation does not justify a minimal liquidation if a very close and continuous relationship emerges.

No correct figure exists without the facts of the case. Giving an abstract amount to a grandparent risks being misleading. The age of the grandchild, the role played by the grandparents, the duration of the relationship, the composition of the family, and the elements proving its consistency all change. The tables offer a method; the result requires reasoning linked to the specific event.

Insurance claim, criminal proceedings, and civil judgment

The claim can also be addressed to the responsible party's insurance company. In accidents involving vehicles subject to compulsory insurance, the injured party has a direct action against the civil liability insurance company. The information page of the Court of Turin on the joinder of civil parties expressly recalls this possibility with reference to Article 144 of the Private Insurance Code.

Each grandparent must be identified in their own claim. A well-structured claim for compensation should not limit itself to generically indicating the victim's family. It must identify the individual grandfather or grandmother, the relationship with the grandchild, the facts proving it, and the heads of damage claimed. This prevents a personal position from being confused with the legitimate, yet different, claims of other relatives.

Criminal proceedings allow the joinder of a civil party. If proceedings for road homicide are underway, the person harmed by the offense may exercise the civil action within the criminal proceedings against the defendant and any civilly liable party. Alternatively, compensation can be claimed before the civil court. The choice of path is not a formality: it affects how the claim is brought and followed.

It is not advisable to overlap initiatives without a clear line. The compensation claim must maintain consistency between the acting parties, the sums requested, and the chosen forum. An agreement with the insurance company, a joinder as a civil party, or a civil judgment produce effects that must be read in the concrete text of the instrument. Before signing a waiver or a receipt, it is essential to understand which personal claims are included.

Errors to avoid in protecting the relationship with the grandchild

The first error is thinking that a shared surname is enough. The family relationship is the starting point, but for grandparents, proof of the effectiveness of the relationship is of particular importance. The opposite error is considering action useless because there was no cohabitation: case law does not consider that fact an absolute barrier.

The second error is combining all positions into an indistinct narrative. Parents, siblings, and grandparents may share grief, but they do not necessarily suffer the same prejudice. Protection is more understandable when it respectfully and precisely describes the role the grandchild had in each grandparent's life, without exaggerating facts or reducing them to generic formulas.

Frequently asked questions

Can I claim compensation if I did not live with my grandchild?

Yes, cohabitation is not mandatory. However, you must prove that the relationship was effective and consistent. Regular contact, care, mutual support, constant contacts, and people who knew the relationship can help prove it. Different residence does not eliminate the right, but makes it important to explain precisely how the bond was lived.

Is the family status certificate enough to obtain parental loss damages?

No, the certificate mainly proves the relationship or cohabitation. It does not prove the quality of the relationship with the grandchild on its own. It is advisable to pair it with concrete facts: shared habits, assistance provided, frequency of contact, communications, and testimony. The claim must bring out what relationship was lost and not just the degree of kinship.

Do grandparents have the right to the same compensation as parents?

Automatic equality of amounts does not exist. Compensation is assessed for each relative based on the concrete relationship with the victim. The bond between parent and child and that between grandparent and grandchild are not overlapping by definition, but a very intense grandparent-grandchild relationship can be fully relevant and requires individual assessment.

Does compensation recognized to parents exclude that of grandparents?

No, these are different personal positions. Parents and grandparents may each have their own damages for the loss of a parental relationship. A grandparent's claim does not ask for a share of the parents' damages, but for compensation for the harm suffered by the grandparent themselves. For this reason, facts relating to each relationship must be set out separately.

Do the Milan tables establish a fixed sum for grandparents?

No, the tables do not set an identical amount for everyone. The points method considers various elements, including age, cohabitation, presence of other relatives, and the quality of the relationship. The judge must still link the assessment to the proven circumstances. A serious estimate cannot disregard the reconstruction of the truly existing relationship.

Can I claim compensation in the road homicide proceedings?

Yes, the injured party can join as a civil party in criminal proceedings. It also remains possible to take action in the civil forum. The choice requires attention to actions already taken, the insurance company's position, and the claims formulated by other relatives, because the protection of the individual grandparent must be clear and not duplicated.

When it is necessary to clarify each grandparent's position

The right claim starts from the real relationship, not from an automatism. If you need to understand whether the relationship with your grandchild can ground a compensation claim, it is useful to immediately distinguish the grandparent's personal damages from other family claims and collect only the facts that truly describe it. To examine these elements and practical alternatives, you can contact me.