Liability for Damage Caused by Wildlife: Commentary on Ordinance No. 18817 of 2024

The recent Ordinance No. 18817 of July 9, 2024, by the Court of Cassation has shed new light on liability for damages caused by wildlife, establishing fundamental criteria for identifying the responsible entity according to Article 2043 of the Civil Code. This ruling is particularly relevant for all those involved in civil and administrative law, as it clarifies the relationship between regional regulations and responsibilities concerning wildlife management.

The Context of the Ruling

In the case at hand, the Court had to decide on a situation where damages caused by wildlife had been the subject of litigation. The Court of Appeal of Ancona had already expressed a judgment on the matter, but the central issue concerned the identification of the entity responsible for such damages. The Court of Cassation confirmed that, in order to determine who should be held responsible, a concrete assessment of territorial administration powers and wildlife management is necessary.

In general. The entity responsible for damages caused by wildlife, in cases where that responsibility falls under the regulatory provision of Article 2043 of the Civil Code, must be identified as the subject who, based on a concrete assessment, is found to be entrusted with the powers of territorial administration and wildlife management; for the purpose of this assessment, Article 15 of Regional Law No. 25 of 2008 - which establishes a specific "fund for compensation by the Region for damages caused to road traffic by wildlife" in the regional budget - assumes symptomatic relevance of the choice to allocate the "neutralization" of such prejudice to the Region by attributing the functional powers for its prevention. (The Court of Cassation affirmed this principle in a case where the internal judgment on the legal qualification of liability under Article 2043 of the Civil Code had become definitive.)

Applicable Legislation and Jurisprudence

The Court referenced Article 2043 of the Civil Code, which establishes civil liability for tort, and emphasized the importance of Regional Law No. 25 of 2008 of the Marche region, which provides for a fund for compensating damages caused by wildlife. This law, in particular, establishes the methods for managing and preventing damages, highlighting the central role of the Region in coordinating wildlife protection and management activities.

It is essential to underscore that liability is not automatic and must always be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The Court of Cassation reiterated that identifying the responsible entity requires a thorough and specific analysis of the circumstances of the particular case.

  • Civil liability for damages under Article 2043 of the Civil Code.
  • Relevance of regional legislation in wildlife management.
  • Need for concrete assessment to determine the responsible entity.

Conclusions

Ordinance No. 18817 of 2024 represents an important step forward in clarifying liability for damages caused by wildlife. It emphasizes the importance of a concrete and contextual approach in assessing responsibilities, as well as the crucial role of regional regulations in defining the powers and responsibilities of the competent authorities. For legal professionals and local administrations, this ruling offers significant insights for managing issues related to wildlife and preventing associated damages.

Bianucci Law Firm