• via Alberto da Giussano, 26, 20145 Milano
  • +39 02 4003 1253
  • info@studiolegalebianucci.it
  • Criminal Lawyer, Family Lawyer, Divorce Lawyer

Civil Liability and Custody: Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Cassation, Section III, Order No. 22801 of 2017

Civil liability, particularly that arising from the custody of property and public roads, represents a topic of great legal relevance. The judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 22801 of 2017 provides significant insights regarding the liability of the Municipality in a case of a traffic accident. Let us analyze the key points of this decision.

The Case and the Dynamics of the Accident

In 2001, B. M., a young motorcyclist, suffered a serious accident due to an unmarked groove on the municipal road of Pozzolengo, which caused him to lose control of the vehicle and collide with a defective guardrail. In the first instance, the Brescia Court recognized the liability of the Municipality, ordering it to compensate for substantial damages. However, the Court of Appeal overturned the ruling, excluding the Municipality's liability and attributing the cause of the accident to the young man's reckless behavior.

The Reasons of the Court of Cassation

The Court of Cassation, analyzing the appeal, focuses on various significant legal aspects. In particular, it highlights that:

  • The liability under Article 2051 of the Civil Code implies a burden of proof on the plaintiff to demonstrate the causal link between the custodian's conduct and the damage suffered.
  • The Court of Appeal erred in not adequately considering the role of the defective guardrail, which had a direct impact on the exacerbation of the injuries sustained by the motorcyclist.
  • The protective function of roadside barriers should be interpreted not only as preventing vehicles from leaving the roadway but also as protecting road users from serious consequences in the event of accidents.
The purpose of the installation of the side barrier is to reduce the danger of the roadway section where it is located.

Conclusions and Legal Implications

The Court of Cassation accepts B. M.'s appeal regarding the aggravation of harmful consequences due to the defective guardrail, referring the matter back to the Court of Appeal for a new assessment. This ruling emphasizes the importance of road maintenance and the responsibility of public administrations in ensuring the safety of users. Furthermore, it highlights how the dynamics of an accident must be examined carefully, considering all factors that may have contributed to the consequences suffered by the injured party.