The causal link in medical liability: Supreme Court No. 547/25
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Authors
Cass. pen. no. 547/2025 follows the path of the Franzese sentence, reiterating that the causal link must be established through a counterfactual judgment based on high logical probability, and not on mere possibilities or abstract statistical data. The Court emphasizes the distinction between scientific certainty and procedural certainty, requiring a rationale that demonstrates, in rational terms, that correct conduct would have avoided or significantly delayed the event.
In continuity with similar sentences, such as Cass. pen. 9705/2022 and Cass. pen. 1788/2026, the sentence emphasizes the necessity of excluding concrete alternative causes and basing the judgment on reliable clinical evidence, integrated with coherent legal reasoning.
A rigorous model of causal assessment emerges, in which the criminal liability of the healthcare professional is based not on the error itself, but on its actual etiological impact, confirming that causality represents the true core of the criminal decision in the medical field.
Downloads
Citations
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
