Compensation for loss of parental relationship damage: commentary on Order no. 761 of 2025

The recent Order no. 761 of January 12, 2025, by the Court of Cassation provides important clarifications regarding the liquidation of damage for loss of parental relationship. This type of compensation is particularly delicate, as it concerns moral suffering and the impairment of family relationships resulting from the death of a relative. The Court emphasized the importance of adequate reasoning by the judge, especially when using tables for damage liquidation.

Context of the ruling

The case involved R. (S. G.) and A. (M. A. A.), and led to the assessment of equitable liquidation of the damage suffered by family members following the death of a relative. The Court of Appeal had initially reduced the amount awarded in the first instance, limiting itself to referring to an average tariff value without clarifying the calculation elements used. This raised questions about the correctness of the decision.

The ruling's headnote

In general. In the equitable liquidation of damage for loss of parental relationship, in its components of subjective moral suffering and dynamic-relational impairment resulting from the death of a relative, the judge, when using the tabular tool, is required to indicate in the reasoning the calculation elements used in order to make clear the process followed to arrive at a liquidation consistent with the evidence, including presumptive evidence, that emerged during the proceedings. (In this case, the Supreme Court quashed the appealed judgment which had reduced, within the limits of the "average tariff value", the amount awarded in the first instance to the relatives, without specifying which edition of the table prepared by the Observatory of Civil Justice of Milan had been referenced and without reasoning the ordered reduction, in light of the recognized intensity of the family bond).

The relevance of reasoning

The Court of Cassation clarified that, when using a tabular tool for damage liquidation, the judge must provide adequate reasoning. This includes indicating the calculation elements used and an explanation of the logical path followed to reach the final decision. The lack of such details can lead to the annulment of the judgment, as happened in the case in question.

• Importance of reasoning for the transparency of liquidation.
• Need to indicate the table used for calculation.
• Recognition of the intensity of the family bond as a determining factor.

Conclusions

In summary, Order no. 761 of 2025 represents an important step forward in protecting the rights of family members of victims of fatal accidents. The Court of Cassation reiterated that the liquidation of damage for loss of parental relationship must be carried out with the utmost transparency and reasoning. This not only ensures fair justice but also protects the rights of victims and their relatives, ensuring that judicial decisions are based on clear and understandable evidence.