With a recent sentence, the Court of Appeal of Ancona has held that the burden of the worker, who complains of having suffered damage to health due to the work carried out, the burden of proving the existence of such damage , as well as the harmfulness of the work environment, as well as the connection between one and the other, while the employer has the burden of proving that he has adopted all the precautions necessary to prevent the damage suffered from occurring, or that the illness is not linked to the violation of his obligations; this is whether the question qualifies in terms of contractual liability pursuant to art. 2087 of the Italian Civil Code, whether there is a violation of the principle of ” neminem laedere ” pursuant to art. 2043 of the Italian Civil Code.

The College, having recalled the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on contractual liability, reiterated that the entrepreneur’s liability can be affirmed if there is an injury to the protected property that derives causally from the violation of certain behavioral obligations imposed by law or suggested by circumstances. experimental or technical and that, therefore, the verification of the damage is not in itself sufficient to trigger on the entrepreneur the burden of proof of having adopted all sorts of suitable measures to avoid the event, given that the release proof to its load always presupposes the demonstration that there has been an omission in preparing the safety measures (suggested by the particularity of the work, experience and technique) necessary to avoid the damage, which are actually payable,while it cannot be extended to any hypothetical preventive measure, on pain of expiring a liability for fault into an objective liability.

Read more