– A medical reassessment finding that the eligibility conditions for a social assistance benefit are no longer satisfied does not automatically make every payment already received recoverable. The timing of notification and the recipient’s…
– INPS’s access to income information is central to assessing a demand for repayment of social assistance benefits. Where the Institute knew, or could have known, the relevant information and the recipient did not act fraudulently, reliance…
– A subsequent judicial finding that medical eligibility existed from the reassessment date may affect an INPS repayment demand. Judgment No. 593 of 3 March 2026, delivered by the Tribunal of Foggia, distinguishes protection of legitimate…
– A repayment demand against an heir cannot be assessed solely by comparing payments with the applicable income limits. Good faith and the beneficiary’s legitimate reliance on the regularity of payments also matter in social assistance…
– Notification of an adverse medical reassessment is crucial when recovering social assistance benefits. If payment preceded the recipient’s knowledge that eligibility had ended, good faith and reliance on entitlement must be examined. The…
– Payment before notification of an adverse reassessment may create legitimate expectations deserving protection. The actual sequence of events matters: the examination date must not be confused with the date on which its conclusions become…
– Recognition of a benefit during proceedings may remove the need for a decision on the merits without resolving the question of costs. Costs must be allocated by considering which party would have lost and whose conduct made proceedings…
– Requesting a further medical assessment does not, by itself, demonstrate that a beneficiary knows that entitlement to a benefit already being paid has ended. The Bari Court of Appeal emphasised this distinction in judgment No. 535 of 4…
– Restoration of the Italian personal assistance allowance during proceedings does not automatically mean that each party must bear its own costs. In judgment No. 660 of 26 May 2025, the Bari Court of Appeal applied the prospective…
– The sequence of payment, reassessment notification and recovery demand is decisive when assessing legitimate expectations. In judgment No. 181 of 14 March 2025, the Bari Court of Appeal overturned the Tribunal of Foggia’s decision and held…
– Removal from the population register is not conclusive proof that a beneficiary is outside Italy. Concrete evidence of continued presence must also be assessed when deciding whether suspended social assistance benefits are payable. This…
– Payment of a benefit during proceedings may remove the need for a ruling on the merits, while leaving costs for the judge to decide. In judgment No. 47 of 8 January 2025, the Tribunal of Foggia examined when the steps necessary to obtain…
– The interval between payment of a social assistance benefit and notification of an overpayment can be relevant to legitimate expectations. In judgment No. 1588 of 7 November 2024, the Tribunal of Velletri considered an INPS demand against…
– Failure to collect a communication does not necessarily prevent it from taking legal effect. The Tribunal of Foggia’s judgment No. 2328 of 11 September 2024 considers deemed receipt after the postal holding period and distinguishes an…
– Entitlement to the Italian ordinary incapacity pension and the date from which it becomes payable are separate matters. Once the medical and contribution conditions are established, continued employment does not, by itself, justify…
– The date of an expert examination does not necessarily establish when eligibility for a social assistance benefit began. In judgment No. 667 of 2 May 2024, the Bari Court of Appeal awarded the Italian attendance allowance from the medical…
– Severe disability status has independent legal significance and can be judicially established without identifying a particular benefit sought. The Tribunal of Foggia applied this principle in judgment No. 1212 of 10 April 2024, also…
– INPS’s actual knowledge of income can be decisive even where the beneficiary has not proved sending a particular notification. In judgment No. 1146 of 4 April 2023, the Tribunal of Foggia relied on information in the online social security…
– Omission of the Italian court filing fee, the contributo unificato, from a costs assessment does not always require an application to correct the decision. In its order of 24 February 2024, the Tribunal of Lecce explained that a costs…
– A recovery demand covering several months requires separate examination of payments made before and after reassessment notification. In judgment No. 2269 of 27 December 2023, the Bari Court of Appeal applied this distinction to reduce, but…
– Attending a reassessment does not, by itself, prove that the beneficiary knows its adverse outcome. Where notification of the report is not established, reliance on subsequent payments must be considered. The Bari Court of Appeal addressed…
– Where a repayment demand follows a medical reassessment, it is necessary to establish whether the disputed instalment was paid before the recipient learned of the outcome. The Tribunal of Bari applied that test in judgment No. 297 of 25…
– An inaccurate benefit name cannot be considered in isolation where the case documents clearly identify the right recognised. The Tribunal of Foggia applied this approach in judgment No. 391 of 6 February 2024 to a court approval order…
Within civil and employment law, I focus primarily on social security and social assistance in disputes with INPS and INAIL: pensions and allowances under the Italian invalidità civile system, the ordinary invalidity allowance, allowances for personal assistance and for attendance at school or rehabilitation centres, exemptions from healthcare charges, the Disability Card, targeted employment placement for people with disabilities, blindness, deafness, recognition of disability status, workplace injuries and occupational diseases. Learn more →