{"id":51,"date":"2026-01-15T11:19:51","date_gmt":"2026-01-15T11:19:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/morelli-bolzoni.nyx.local\/?p=51"},"modified":"2026-03-28T14:05:11","modified_gmt":"2026-03-28T14:05:11","slug":"the-judgment-of-the-united-sections-no-4892-2025-balance-between-the-right-to-compensation-and-the-burden-of-proof","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/la-sentenza-delle-sezioni-unite-n-4892-2025-equilibrio-tra-diritto-al-risarcimento-e-onere-della-prova\/","title":{"rendered":"The Ruling of the United Sections No. 4892\/2025: Balancing the Right to Compensation and the Burden of Proof"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The recent ruling of the United Sections of the Court of Cassation, no. 4892 of 25 February 2025, marked an important turning point in tenancy law, resolving a long-standing jurisprudential conflict concerning the landlord's right to obtain compensation for loss of profit in the event of early termination of the lease due to the tenant's breach of contract.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>The Principle of Law<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The ruling establishes that compensation for damages is not automatic but must be proven by the landlord. This means that the owner must demonstrate that they took prompt action to re-let the property after its early return, that despite these efforts they were unable to conclude a new lease agreement within a reasonable time, and that the loss of income was a direct consequence of the tenant's breach of contract.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Inapplicability of Article 1591 of the Civil Code.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A crucial aspect of the ruling is the inapplicability of Article 1591 of the Italian Civil Code, which governs compensation for delayed return of the property, stating that a tenant in default for returning the rented property is obliged to pay the lessor the agreed rent until the property is returned, without prejudice to the obligation to compensate for greater damages. The Court has clarified that this rule does not apply when the termination occurs before the contractual expiry, as the tenant does not retain the property beyond the agreed terms but returns it early.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Practical implications<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This decision marks an important milestone for the management of rental disputes. On the one hand, it protects the landlord by allowing them to obtain compensation if they demonstrate the damage suffered. On the other hand, it prevents compensation from being automatically awarded without a concrete verification of the circumstances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For landlords, it becomes crucial to gather documentary evidence of efforts made to re-rent the property, such as advertisements and instructions to real estate agencies. For tenants, the decision offers greater certainty regarding the financial consequences of early termination of the contract.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Contractual Balance and Good Faith<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The ruling of the United Sections lays down a balanced criterion based on the principle of contractual good faith and the need for rigorous evidential assessment before awarding compensation for lost profits. This approach protects both the owner's rights and the necessity of avoiding unjustified compensation, ensuring that each decision is based on a concrete evaluation of the specific circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In conclusion, ruling no. 4892\/2025 represents a significant step forward in defining the rights and obligations of parties in a lease agreement, offering a clearer and more consistent framework for resolving disputes related to the early termination of lease agreements.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>La recente sentenza delle Sezioni Unite della Corte di Cassazione, n. 4892 del 25 febbraio 2025, ha segnato un importante punto di svolta nel diritto delle locazioni, risolvendo un contrasto giurisprudenziale di lunga data riguardante il diritto del locatore a ottenere il risarcimento del danno per il mancato guadagno in caso di risoluzione anticipata del [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":53,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-51","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-corporate-governance-e-compliance"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=51"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":52,"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51\/revisions\/52"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/53"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/morellibolzoni.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}