65
Order 13725/2024 of 16 May 2024 of the Court of Cassation, which ruled on Article 145-bis of the Private Insurance Code, has shed new light on a controversial and highly topical issue: the evidentiary value of the recordings of the so-called “black boxes” installed on board vehicles.
The aforementioned article, as is known, introduced in 2017, provided that the recordings of the data collection devices coming from the vehicles, in the event of an accident, were full proof of the dynamics of the accident.
This legislative provision, aimed at simplifying and accelerating compensation procedures, had raised many doubts in doctrine and jurisprudence, as it seemed to attribute an almost absolute probative value to data collected by private instruments, without specific regulation regarding the methods of installation, operation and conservation of the devices.
With order 13725/2024, the Court of Cassation put a stop to the initial enthusiasm, stating that the recordings from the black boxes cannot be considered full evidence, as the necessary implementing decrees that regulate in detail the methods of acquisition, conservation and evaluation of such data are missing (“Since Article 145 bis of Legislative Decree 209/2005 has remained unimplemented as the relevant decrees, provided for by Article 132 bis, have never been issued, it is not possible to attribute legal value to data collected by an instrument produced by a private individual for a private individual without it being subjected to any form of control or compliance with certain parameters.”).
In detail, the Ermellini, raising many doubts on the constitutionality of article 145-bisto the extent that it attributes such a high probative value to a means of proof that does not offer the necessary guarantees of impartiality and reliability, have highlighted how the absence of a regulation that defines the technical characteristics of the devices, the installation methods and the procedures for verifying their integrity makes it impossible to attribute full legal value to the recordings.
Moreover, the Supreme Court Judges have also clarified that Article 145-bis it cannot, in any way, be interpreted extensively, attributing probative value to devices already installed before the entry into force of the implementing decrees.
The decision of the Court of Cassation has important implications for both the injured parties and the insurance companies, given that, in the absence of clear regulation, the recordings from the black boxes may be used as simple evidence, but will not be sufficient to incontrovertibly determine liability in the event of an accidentconsequently, Judges will be called upon to evaluate the black box recordings more carefully, comparing them with other available evidence.
Ordinance 13725/2024 represents an important turning point in the debate on black boxes and their usability in the context of proceedings. The decision of the Court of Cassation, while not definitively calling into question the usefulness of these devices, requires a more in-depth reflection on the methods of use and the guarantees necessary to ensure their reliability.
Salvis Juris – Rivista di informazione juridica
Copyrights © 2015 – ISSN 2464-9775
***
The following two tabs change content below.