A healthcare facility’s recovery action against a physician was ruled inadmissible by the Tribunal of Bologna because the structure failed to notify the doctor about settlement negotiations that led to a €100,000 payout. The ruling, issued as sentence No. 3716 on April 29, 2026, hinges on notification duties under Italy’s Gelli-Bianco law.
The case behind the ruling
The dispute began when a woman consulted an orthopedic doctor about her health condition. The doctor recommended dorsolumbar arthrodesis surgery, which he performed at a Veneto healthcare facility under a freelance collaboration arrangement.
Two days after the operation, the patient developed infectious complications at the surgical site. After treatment, she was discharged. Roughly eighteen months later, her lawyer sent the facility a compensation claim over post-operative infectious problems that required a second surgery at another hospital to remove the fixation devices.
The patient then summoned the healthcare facility to a mediation procedure. It told the doctor it would invite him to participate, and it did. The physician and insurance companies attended.
Related: Lawyer Owes 8 Months’ Salary to Secretary
Mediation ended without an agreement.
Months later, the patient filed a lawsuit against the facility. The structure informed the doctor of the proceedings and said it would bring him into the case. About five months after that, it and its insurer reached a settlement with the patient, paying that sum. The lawsuit was dropped, and the facility then demanded reimbursement from the doctor. When he didn’t pay, it took him to court.
What the Gelli-Bianco law actually requires
The court examined the admissibility of the recovery action under the Gelli-Bianco statute. Under that law, the recovery action is inadmissible if the healthcare facility fails to communicate to the doctor the start of settlement negotiations pending the compensation lawsuit.
Failing to send these communications makes the recovery action inadmissible.
Why the claim failed
In this specific case, the court found that the facility had informed the doctor about the lawsuit. But the structure hadn’t proven that the physician was notified about the settlement negotiations between it, its insurer, and the patient — the talks that produced the payout.
Related: Burnham vows to help UK businesses
The court rejected the facility’s argument that its earlier communication about the mediation procedure satisfied its obligation. The law refers to communication of settlement negotiations, not mediation proceedings. The negotiations that led to the settlement happened after the lawsuit was filed and after mediation had already failed.
That timing was decisive.
The doctor was never told about the negotiations that actually mattered, nor given a chance to participate in them. Those talks were different from the earlier mediation, which the physician had attended and which ended without resolution.
Because the facility failed to meet its notification obligations, the court declared the recovery action inadmissible and dismissed it entirely.
