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

Liability of Public Administration: Analysis of Ordinance No. 25925 of 2019

In ordinance No. 25925 dated October 15, 2019, the Supreme Court of Cassation addressed a crucial case concerning the liability of Public Administration (P.A.) in relation to damages caused by a municipal road. This case, stemming from a traffic accident that occurred in 2011, highlighted important aspects related to the custody of roads and the safety of users.

The Case and the Court's Decision

The appeal was filed by the Municipality of Bagni di Lucca after the Court of Appeal of Florence had ordered the entity to compensate approximately 297,282 euros in favor of T.V., who was a victim of an accident due to the presence of ice on the road and the lack of an adequate guardrail. The Court ruled that the municipality's liability was based on Article 2051 of the Civil Code, which deals with liability for things in custody.

The liability of public administration can materialize in the violation of common prudence rules concerning the risks inherent to a thing, such as an inadequate guardrail.

The Implications of the Ruling

The decision of the Cassation clarifies that, to exclude the liability of the P.A. under Article 2051 of the Civil Code, it is not sufficient to invoke the difficulty of control over a large road area. In fact, if the damage arises from intrinsic causes of the asset (such as a construction defect), the P.A. is liable. In this specific case, the Court highlighted that the guardrail did not meet the required safety standards, proving insufficient to protect users from accidents, even at low speeds.

  • The ice on the road was a causal factor, but the lack of an adequate guardrail was considered the main cause of the accident.
  • The Municipality did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate negligent conduct on the part of the vehicle driver, an element that could have excluded or mitigated liability.
  • The court also reiterated that the P.A. must ensure the safety of the public asset, without being able to disregard it based on the temporality of safety regulations.

Conclusions

Ordinance No. 25925 of 2019 represents an important reference for jurisprudence regarding the liability of Public Administration. It emphasizes the importance of ensuring the safety of public infrastructures and not underestimating the intrinsic risks associated with things in custody. Public Administrations must therefore adopt appropriate measures to prevent accidents and protect users, being accountable for any damages that may arise from their negligence.