The civil liability of public bodies: commentary on judgment Cass. civ., Sez. III, Ord. n. 27411/2021

Judgment no. 27411 of 2021 by the Court of Cassation represents an important intervention on the civil liability of public bodies, particularly in school contexts. The case concerned a claim for damages by heirs for the death of a disabled child during school hours, due to alleged negligent conduct by school staff and the social worker. Let's analyze the salient points of the decision and its legal implications.

Context of the judgment

The Court of Appeal had initially upheld the decision of the Court of Macerata which had rejected the claim for damages, holding that there had been no negligence in calling for help and that, in any case, timely assistance would not have saved the child's life. However, the appellants appealed this decision, arguing the illogicality of the reasoning and the contradiction of the statements.

Grounds for appeal and the Cassation's decision

The appellants presented several grounds for appeal, including:

• Violation of art. 132 c.p.c. for the poor reasoning of the judgment.
• Misapplication of the rules on the duty to call for help.
• Omission of reasoning regarding the conclusions of the technical consultancy.

The reasoning of the contested judgment appears merely apparent and entirely generic.

The Court of Cassation upheld the appeal, highlighting the motivational anomaly of the contested judgment. In particular, the contradiction between the actual time elapsed for calling for help and the conclusion that this delay could not have influenced the tragic outcome was highlighted. The Cassation recalled that, according to the technical consultancy, a timely call to 118 could have saved the child's life.

Legal implications of the judgment

This judgment has important implications regarding the civil liability of public bodies, as it reiterates the need for clear and coherent reasoning in judgments on the merits. Furthermore, it emphasizes the importance of prompt intervention in emergency situations, especially when vulnerable individuals such as disabled minors are involved. The Cassation clarified that the responsible parties, in this case school staff and the social worker, must act diligently to ensure the safety of children.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment Cass. civ., Sez. III, Ord. n. 27411/2021, offers an important reflection on civil liability in the school environment and the obligation to ensure a safe environment for all students. The decision of the Court of Cassation not only upholds the appellants' claims but also establishes a significant precedent for future legal disputes concerning the liability of public bodies.