Press Room

The Supreme Court, starting from a case of erroneous recognition of the objective content of evidence, takes the opportunity to outline the boundaries of what is traditionally known as misrepresentation of evidence. Recalling some of its own precedents and, at the same time, differing from others, the decisum in comment delineates, with an evident clarifying intent, the remedies that may be exercised in the various cases in which the trial judge has decided on the basis of misrepresented evidence.