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

Civil liability for damages from hazards: an analysis of the ruling Cass. Civ., Sez. III, n. 8306/2024

The Court of Cassation, with ordinance no. 8306 of March 27, 2024, addressed a case of civil liability involving the Municipality of Altavilla Milicia and a fatal traffic accident. The ruling provides important insights regarding the responsibility of public entities in road maintenance and the role of the victim's behavior in determining the causal link.

The case and legal issues

The accident occurred in 1998 and resulted in the death of a moped driver, who hit an abandoned tire on the roadway. The victim's family sued the Municipality, arguing the entity's liability for the lack of road maintenance and for the hazard posed by the dangerous object. The Court of Appeal of Palermo initially granted the compensation request, but the Municipality appealed, disputing the qualification of liability.

The custodian's liability is provided by law due to the very existence of a custody relationship and can only be discharged by proving the fortuitous event.

Legal principles established by the Court of Cassation

In its ruling, the Court reaffirmed the applicability of Article 2051 of the Civil Code concerning liability for things in custody, highlighting that the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff to demonstrate the causal link, while the custodian can only discharge their liability by proving the fortuitous event. The Court emphasized that the behavior of the injured party must be considered in assessing the incident, in line with the principle of self-responsibility provided by Article 2 of the Constitution and Article 1227 of the Civil Code.

  • The conduct of the injured party must be examined to assess its causal impact on the harmful event.
  • The transportation of a passenger on a moped approved for a single driver affects the safety of the ride.
  • The failure of the driver to wear a helmet must be considered for reconstructing the causation of the accident.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the ruling of the Court of Cassation no. 8306/2024 represents an important clarification regarding the responsibility of public entities in cases of damages arising from road hazards. It highlights the importance of also evaluating the behavior of the injured party in determining liability, stressing that responsibility cannot always be exclusively attributed to the custodian of the road. The decision invites broader reflection on the need for greater attention from road users and institutions in preventing accidents.