Comment on judgment no. 16755 of 2024: joint and several liability and prescription

Judgment no. 16755 of 2024 by the Court of Cassation offers an important reflection on the issue of joint and several liability and the prescription of obligations arising from tortious acts. With this order, the Judge established that the diversity of grounds for liability among co-obligors does not affect the interruption of prescription. This aspect is crucial for understanding how the right to compensation for damages is structured in situations of shared liability.

Context of the judgment

In the specific case, the Court confirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal of Naples, which had considered the interrupting effect of prescription to be extended in favour of individual condominium complexes. This decision was made following the constitution of civil parties in the criminal proceedings against the former administrators, deemed responsible for a tort that caused a person's death due to the collapse of a railing.

Legal principles involved

JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY - PRESCRIPTION Obligation arising from tortious act - Diversity of grounds for liability of co-obligors - Impact on the regime of interruption of the prescription period - Exclusion - Basis - Case law. In terms of prescription of the right to compensation for damages from a tortious act attributable to multiple parties, jointly and severally liable, the diversity of grounds for liability attributable to the various co-obligors does not affect the interruption of prescription, which remains governed by the principles on joint and several obligations and, specifically, by art. 1310, paragraph 1, of the Italian Civil Code, for whose applicability the existence of the joint and several obligation arising from the uniqueness of the harmful event provided for by art. 2055 of the Italian Civil Code is necessary and sufficient. (In this case, the Supreme Court confirmed the lower court's judgment which had considered the interrupting effect of prescription, with respect to individual condominium complexes, produced by the constitution of civil parties in the criminal proceedings against the former administrators, authors of the tort, consisting of the omission of maintenance of a railing and the omission of adequate precautions to prevent its collapse which caused the fall and consequent death of a person).

Practical implications of the judgment

This judgment has several practical implications, including:

• Confirmation that, in cases of joint and several liability, the interruption of prescription occurs even if the co-obligors are liable for different grounds.
• Emphasis on the importance of the constitution of civil parties, which can have a significant interrupting effect on prescription periods.
• Strengthening of the principle of solidarity in obligations, making it easier for victims to obtain compensation.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment no. 16755 of 2024 represents an important clarification on joint and several liability and prescription. It offers a regulatory framework that protects victims of tortious acts, ensuring they have the possibility to pursue compensation even in the presence of co-obligors with different liabilities. This is a step forward in the protection of people's rights, confirming the importance of solidarity in obligations.