A permanent aftereffect changes how compensation is calculated. After an accident, the question is not just about the percentage of disability indicated in a medico-legal report: it matters to understand which table applies, what is already included in the baseline value, and when the personal consequences of the lesion allow for an increase. Doubts often arise regarding moral damages, medical expenses, and loss of income: distinct items that should not be confused or automatically added together.
In this guide, I explain how to read the assessment criteria for permanent injury, with particular attention to the Unified National Table that entered into force on March 5, 2025. We will also see why personalization requires specific and documented facts and why financial loss follows a path distinct from biological damage.
What Permanent Injury Is and What the Disability Percentage Measures
Permanent injury is the stable consequence of the lesion. We speak of a permanent aftereffect when, once the treatment phase has concluded and clinical stabilization is reached, physical or psychological limitations remain that are subject to medico-legal assessment. The disability percentage expresses the severity of the impairment, but it does not coincide on its own with the final compensation amount.
Biological damage concerns health, not income. Article 138 of the Insurance Code defines biological damage as an impairment of psycho-physical integrity that negatively affects daily activities and the dynamic-relational aspects of life. In other words, it considers what the person is or is no longer able to do in everyday life, regardless of their capacity to produce income.
Age and disability contribute to the baseline value. The same percentage does not necessarily determine the same assessment for people of different ages. The tabular system considers both the degree of permanent disability and the injured party's age; moreover, as the percentage increases, the value attributed to disability points grows more than proportionally.
Which Table Applies After March 5, 2025
For disabilities from 10 to 100 percent, a national table exists. Presidential Decree no. 12 of January 13, 2025, adopted the Unified National Table provided for by Article 138 of the Insurance Code for non-minor injuries. The regulation entered into force on March 5, 2025, and contains the economic value of disability points, with coefficients linked to the age of the injured person. You can consult Presidential Decree no. 12 of 2025 published in the Official Gazette.
The date of the accident remains a decisive element. The transitional provision linked to the Unified National Table provides for its application to accidents and events occurring from March 5, 2025. Therefore, it is incorrect to treat an incident that occurred before that date and one that occurred subsequently in the same way, without considering the applicable regulatory and jurisprudential framework.
The Unified National Table is now also a general reference parameter. With judgment no. 8630 of April 7, 2026, the Court of Cassation clarified that the U.N.T. operates, in assessments outside its direct scope or referred to events prior to March 5, 2025, as a parameter for the equitable assessment of health damage. The judge may depart from it, but must state the reasons for resorting to different criteria in light of particular circumstances. The principle and its scope are illustrated in the judgment of the Court of Cassation no. 8630 of 2026.
Minor permanent injuries follow a distinct discipline. For traffic accidents with permanent aftereffects up to 9 percent, Article 139 of the Insurance Code establishes its own criteria. This distinction affects both the assessment value and the limit of personalization: therefore, it is not enough to speak generically of "permanent injury" without identifying the recognized medico-legal percentage. The current text is available in Article 139 of the Private Insurance Code.
Biological Damage, Moral Damage, and Personalization Are Not the Same Item
The table is not an indistinct sum of prejudices. Presidential Decree no. 12 of 2025 distinguishes a table referring to biological damage and a table that also considers moral damage, with minimum, average, and maximum values. Moral damage concerns inner suffering caused by the lesion; biological damage instead concerns the impact of the impairment on daily and relational life.
The same consequence cannot be added twice. If the tabular value used already includes the component of moral suffering, this cannot be duplicated with an additional identical item merely by changing its name. It is necessary to understand precisely which table was applied, which value was chosen, and which consequences are already compensated in the settlement proposal.
Personalization highlights additional and proven personal effects. For non-minor injuries, Article 138 allows the judge to increase the amount calculated according to the U.N.T. by up to 30 percent when the impairment significantly affects specific personal dynamic-relational aspects that are documented and objectively ascertained. It is not an automatic increase linked solely to the severity of the accident.
Consequences that exceed the ordinary ones of the lesion are required. A concrete limitation in carrying out a habitual personal activity, an assistance need strictly connected to the aftereffects, or the documented loss of a specific relational capacity may assume relevance. The decisive fact is not the label used in the request, but the connection between the impairment, the person's concrete life, and the available evidence.
The limit changes for injuries up to 9 percent. Within the scope of Article 139, personalization can reach up to 20 percent when there is a significant impact on documented and objectively ascertained personal dynamic-relational aspects or psycho-physical suffering of particular intensity. The difference between the 20 and 30 percent ceiling therefore depends on the type of injury and the applicable rules, not on a free choice of the person formulating the request.
Financial Loss Requires Separate Proof
The tables compensate for damage to the person, not every economic consequence. Medical expenses, assistance costs, the need for aids, lost earnings, and reduction of specific working capacity may constitute financial loss, but they are not automatically included in the tabular amount of permanent biological damage.
Every economic loss must have a nexus with the accident. It is not enough to prove that an expense was incurred or that income decreased after the incident. It is necessary to link that consequence to the lesion and distinguish it from different causes. Healthcare invoices, prescriptions, receipts, tax documentation, and data on compensation or wages can have different functions: they prove the outlay, the necessity of the treatment, or the actual economic loss.
The Civil Code requires looking at actual loss and loss of profits. For unlawful acts, Article 2056 refers to the criteria of Articles 1223, 1226, and 1227 of the Civil Code: compensation includes the immediate and direct consequences of the act, while equitable assessment does not eliminate the need to prove the existence of the prejudice. The text of the Civil Code on Normattiva allows these provisions to be consulted.
How to Read a Compensation Proposal Without Confusing Items
A reliable proposal sets out the calculation data. It should show the permanent disability percentage, the age considered, the tabular criterion adopted, any period of temporary disability, and the individual financial items recognized or excluded. A total amount lacking explanations makes it difficult to understand whether a component has been omitted or already included.
The medico-legal report must be read together with concrete facts. The health document indicates diagnosis, stabilization, aftereffects, and disability percentage; however, it does not replace the proof of additional personal repercussions required for personalization or that of economic losses. If a limitation affects a precise activity, it matters to be able to describe it consistently and support it with objective elements.
Accepting a sum can close the discussion on the items included in the agreement. Before signing a release or a settlement, it is important to verify whether the text qualifies the payment as a final balance and which damages it declares to encompass. If essential data on the aftereffect, future expenses, or loss of earnings are missing, the choice should not be based solely on the final number proposed.
A few orderly elements are sufficient for an initial orientation. Medical reports, certificates of recovery or stabilization, the medico-legal report, the insurance proposal, expense receipts, and documents showing a loss of income help distinguish what concerns biological damage, personalization, and financial loss. Not all documents are needed in every situation: their usefulness depends on the item they must prove.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I obtain biological damage even if I continue to work?
Yes, because biological damage does not coincide with loss of income. Permanent injury can affect daily and relational activities even when a person continues to perform their job. If, in addition to this, there is a concrete decrease in earnings or specific professional capacity, that financial item must be proven separately.
Does the Unified National Table also apply to an accident prior to March 5, 2025?
It does not operate automatically by direct application. The transitional rules link the U.N.T. to events occurring from March 5, 2025. However, the Court of Cassation, with judgment no. 8630 of April 7, 2026, indicates it as a general parameter of equitable assessment even for prior events; the judge may adopt a different criterion only with adequate motivation.
Can I ask for 30 percent more for personalization?
30 percent is a maximum limit, not an automatic addition. For non-minor injuries, specific personal dynamic-relational effects are needed, documented and objectively ascertained, which significantly impact beyond the consequences normally considered by the tabular calculation. For minor permanent injuries under Article 139, the limit is instead 20 percent.
Must moral damage always be paid separately?
No, duplications must be avoided. The U.N.T. also provides a table for biological damage including the moral component, with minimum, average, and maximum values. Before asking for an additional item, it is necessary to understand what the value already applied includes and whether additional personal consequences exist that justify personalization.
Do future medical expenses fall within the tabular value?
As a rule no, if they constitute a distinct financial outlay. The tabular value concerns non-patrimonial damage to health; treatments, therapies, assistance, or aids may require a separate assessment. It becomes essential to prove their necessity, cost, and connection with the permanent consequences of the accident.
A Framework to Keep Distinct
Proper compensation does not arise from the simple sum of labels. First, the medico-legal aftereffect and applicable tabular parameter are identified; then, it is verified whether moral damage is already included, whether concrete facts exist for personalization, and whether there are autonomous economic losses to be proven. If you need to read a settlement proposal or an agreement, you can contact me to frame these items with care.