FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2413302729> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2413302729 endingPage "22" @default.
• W2413302729 startingPage "317" @default.
• W2413302729 abstract "The aim of this paper is to carry out an analysis of the legal evolution in Italy of the assessment of causation i.e. cause and effect, in oncological diseases, a question taken into consideration by the High Court almost exclusively with reference to pleural mesothelioma. The most debated question when defining the causal association between asbestos exposure and mesothelioma is the possible role that any multiple potentially causative exposures could assume in the induction and development of the disease, and in particular the role of any asbestos exposure over the successive employment periods. Indeed, this is a subject on which, to date, no agreement has yet been reached in scientific doctrine: these divergences bear important practical significance from a legal point of view, since sustaining one thesis or another may constitute determining factors when ascertaining responsibility for individuals who, in the past, had decisional statuses in the workplace. Jurisprudence in the High Court took on an oscillating position on this question as from the early 2000s, which was divided into those who sustained the thesis of the relevance of any asbestos exposure over the successive employment periods and those who were of a different opinion, i.e. only the first exposure period has relevant causative effect. The point under discussion concerns, in particular, the adequacy of a probabilistic law only governing such a question. An important turning point was made in the year 2010 when two sentences were announced in the High Court, reiterating, in strict compliance with the principles affirmed by the United Sections in 2002, that a judge cannot, and must not, be satisfied with a general causation, but must rather reach a judgment on the basis of an individual causation. In particular, not only did the second of these two sentences recognise the multifactorial nature of mesothelioma, something which had almost always been denied in jurisprudence in the past, but it also established some very clear legal principles of law. Essentially, when ascertaining the causation, a judge should verify whether or not there is a sufficiently well established scientific law covering the question and whether such a law is universal or probabilistic. Should the latter be the case, then it is necessary to establish if the accelerating effect has been determined in the case in question, on the basis of the factual acquisitions. We must now wait for the concrete application of these principles by juridical bodies." @default.
• W2413302729 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2413302729 creator A5071329268 @default.
• W2413302729 date "2011-11-12" @default.
• W2413302729 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2413302729 title "[Causation in the court: the complex case of malignant mesothelioma]." @default.
• W2413302729 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22073682" @default.
• W2413302729 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2413302729 type Work @default.
• W2413302729 sameAs 2413302729 @default.
• W2413302729 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2413302729 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2413302729 hasAuthorship W2413302729A5071329268 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C158154518 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C161191863 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C166151441 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C191897082 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C2777407522 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C2777855551 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C510490043 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C71043370 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C142724271 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C158154518 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C161191863 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C166151441 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C17744445 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C191897082 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C192562407 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C199539241 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C2776211767 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C2777407522 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C2777855551 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C41008148 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C510490043 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C71043370 @default.
• W2413302729 hasConceptScore W2413302729C71924100 @default.
• W2413302729 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2413302729 hasLocation W24133027291 @default.
• W2413302729 hasOpenAccess W2413302729 @default.
• W2413302729 hasPrimaryLocation W24133027291 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2000308002 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2026697412 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2052996815 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2213542464 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2336639259 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2413302729 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2550356062 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W2971426267 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W3012635535 @default.
• W2413302729 hasRelatedWork W4237133228 @default.
• W2413302729 hasVolume "33" @default.
• W2413302729 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2413302729 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2413302729 magId "2413302729" @default.
• W2413302729 workType "article" @default.