Civil Liability and Things in Custody: Analysis of the Judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 7763/2007

The judgment No. 7763 of 2007 of the Court of Cassation offers an important reflection on civil liability in relation to damages caused by things in custody, particularly in the context of highways. In this article, we will explore the details of the ruling and the legal principles it establishes, highlighting the implications for drivers and highway concessionaires.

The Case and the Court's Decision

The case examined by the Court involved a traffic accident in which the appellant, P. P., collided with a dog while traveling on the Pescara-Rome highway. The Court was called upon to assess whether the highway concessionaire, S.A.R.A. S.p.a., was responsible for the damages caused to the appellant's vehicle.

The fortuitous event, which excludes the custodian's liability, should be understood in a broad sense, including the act of a third party and the act of the injured party themselves.

In the first instance, the Justice of the Peace of Sulmona attributed 80% liability to the concessionaire, but the decision was overturned on appeal, where the causal link between the conduct of S.A.R.A. and the accident was denied. The Court of Cassation, with its ruling, accepted the appeal of P. P., emphasizing the importance of liability for damages from things in custody.

The Legal Principles Established by the Court

The Court of Cassation reiterated some fundamental principles regarding liability for damages arising from things in custody, particularly:

  • Liability for damage from things in custody is of an objective nature.
  • The custodian must prove the existence of an external factor that can interrupt the causal link.
  • In the case of highways, custody must consider the specific characteristics of the roads and the available technology.

These principles, although developed in different contexts, apply perfectly to the case in question. The Court clarified that the concessionaire's liability cannot be excluded without adequate proof of an external factor.

Conclusions

The judgment No. 7763/2007 of the Court of Cassation represents a significant step in understanding civil liability in relation to things in custody. It provides clear guidance for drivers and highway concessionaires regarding their responsibilities in the event of accidents. The decision underscores the importance of adequate road safety management and monitoring of animals along highways, in order to prevent harmful events and ensure the safety of road users.

Bianucci Law Firm