Finds insects in supermarket soup: also compensated for shock damage

Those who eat soup with insects bought at the supermarket must also be compensated for shock damage. However, it is the producer and not the shop owner who pays. The Cassazione upheld the appeal of a customer who had been denied biological damage, estimated by a court of law at 9%, for having developed a phobia as a result of the trauma of having ingested a rustic soup, perhaps too rustic, because it was populated by black insects.

The no of the Court of Appeal, which had disregarded a technical advice, was mainly based on a couple of elements, the inattention of the user and his previous episodes of microzooptic visual hallucinations. A disorder, usually due to withdrawal, that leads to seeing small insects walking on the ground. For the Supreme Court, however, the statement by the Nas, which had examined the soup and found the presence of insects, holds true.

In addition, the judges of legitimacy wondered, since it was not specified in the appeal verdict, from where the 'sensitive' information that had been reported in the emergency room history had been taken. It was at the hospital, after he had run after the surprise meal, that he had been diagnosed with a 'dyspeptic syndrome due to eating unspecified insect-infested food'. The judges of legitimacy upheld his appeal and set aside with reference the sentence that had denied a damage that, according to the judges of first instance, the supermarket owner should have paid. This conclusion was overturned on appeal and confirmed by the Court of Cassation, which affirmed the liability of the producer of the 'eat and drink' soup.