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

Civil Liability and Damage from Custody: Analysis of the Cass. Civ., Ord. No. 4288/2024

The ruling of the Court of Cassation No. 4288 of 2024 offers significant insights into the civil liability of public administrations, particularly regarding damages caused by public works. In this article, we will explore the key points of the decision, analyzing the implications for citizens and public administrations.

The Context of the Ruling

The case originates from a dispute between A.A. and the Municipality of Gragnano, as well as the Campania Region, regarding the damages suffered by a property owned by A.A. following the collapse of a retaining wall. The Court of Appeal of Naples had initially acknowledged the Municipality's liability for the damage caused by the collapse but denied compensation for further damages deemed unnecessary.

Principles of Liability and Custody

The liability of the custodian is based not on a legal title but on the ability to exercise de facto power over the custodied object.

One of the key points of the ruling concerns the application of Art. 2051 of the Civil Code, which establishes the liability of the custodian for damages caused by the object in custody. The Court emphasized that, in this case, the damage claimed was not directly caused by the collapse but by the manner in which the restoration work was carried out, which was performed by the Region and not by the Municipality. This aspect is crucial as it highlights how the absence of de facto power over the asset by the Municipality excludes its liability.

Procedural Aspects and Conclusions

  • The Court accepted the second reason of the main appeal, considering that there was an omission in examining a decisive fact, namely the need for consolidation works on the property.
  • The Municipality successfully appealed, establishing that it was not liable for the damages caused by the restoration works.
  • The case was referred back to the Court of Appeal for a new assessment of the compensable damages, taking into account the geomorphological conditions of the property.

Conclusions

Ruling No. 4288/2024 of the Court of Cassation represents an important reflection on the liability of public administrations in relation to damages from custodied objects. It highlights the need for a thorough analysis of the execution methods of public works and the rights of citizens to be compensated for damages suffered. This case underscores the importance of clarifying the boundaries of liability in complex contexts and provides a significant precedent for future disputes regarding civil liability and public works.