Acceso usuarios
Alessandro Provera
ABSTRAC.T: This article analyses some of the most important aspeéis ofa recent rnling of the Corte Suprema di Cassazione, criminal section no. VI, March 14th, 2017, no. 12175, the so-called "Montefibre II". It is a pivotal judgment in the field of criminal liability for asbestos diseases. Some aspects come to light from this judgement in order to claim that current scientific knoivledge does not allow for a certain establishment of the temporal setting of mesothclioma induction. On the contrary, claiming that the current scientific knowledge allows for the assessment of causal link in the case of mesothelioma would clash with standards established by the Jurisprudence of the Suprema Corte di Cassazione in the "Cozzini" judgement. Though, problems come to light from the statement of the Corte di Cassazione according to which the issue of the existence of scientific knowledge on the accelerator effect can not be referred to the Sezioni Unite. With regard to the control of the judge over scientific knowledge, according to the Court, the economic interest which possibly binds the expert together with the asbestos multinational company involved in the trial can not lead to label the expert as unreliable, in the absence of other elements. On the contrary, this claim should be underpinned by actual circumstances
SoMMARIO: 1. Una lunga vicenda giudiziaria non ancora giunta a termine. - 2. II problema della sussistenza del c.d. effetto acceleratore. - 3. La rimessione della questione alie Sezioni Unite. - 4. I presupposti del 'contrallo' del sapere scientifico da parte del giudice. - 5. L'indipendenza dell'esperto legato da interessi economici con una parte processuale
