Civil Liability on Highways: Analysis of Cass. Civ., Ord. No. 33128/2024

The recent ruling by the Court of Cassation, Section III, No. 33128 of December 18, 2024, provides important insights into the civil liability of highway companies. In this specific case, A. A. suffered damage from the breakage of the windshield of his car, caused by an unidentified object on the roadway. The Court examined various aspects of contractual and tort liability, highlighting the need for a correct assessment of the causal link between the event and the conduct of the custodian.

The Case of A. A. vs. Autostrada BS-VR-VI-PD Spa

In 2019, A. A. sued Autostrada BS-VR-VI-PD Spa for compensation for damages caused by an incident that occurred in 2015. Initially, the Justice of the Peace of Padua accepted the claim for compensation, but subsequently, the Court of Padua reformed the judgment, rejecting A. A.'s claims. The decision of the Court prompted an appeal to the Cassation, where the Court had to assess the adequacy of the legal reasoning of the appellate judge.

The Rationale of the Court of Cassation

In the face of the contractual liability of the highway concessionaire, the causal link between conduct and damage event must be demonstrated according to the principle of the preponderance of the evidence.

The Court accepted the third and fourth grounds of appeal, emphasizing that the liability of the owner or concessionaire of highways is of a contractual nature, arising from the payment of tolls. The obligation to ensure safety conditions on the roadway implies that the custodian must demonstrate the absence of liability, especially in the case of harmful events caused by external factors. The Court pointed out that the judgment of the Court had not adequately analyzed the causal link, merely hypothesizing other possible causes that were not supported by concrete evidence.

The Legal Implications of the Ruling

  • The contractual liability of the highway operator is equated to that of the custodian of a thing.
  • It is the custodian's burden to prove the unpredictability and inevitability of the damaging event to exclude their liability.
  • The principle of the preponderance of the evidence must guide the judgment on causality, preventing the absence of certain evidence from leading to a conclusion of non-liability.

In conclusion, the ruling of the Court of Cassation represents an important confirmation of the principles of civil liability applicable to highway companies, drawing attention to the need for an accurate assessment of the evidence and the circumstances in which damages occur.

Conclusions

Decision No. 33128/2024 of the Cassation offers a clear interpretation of the rules concerning liability in the highway context. Highway companies, as custodians of the roads, must be prepared to demonstrate their lack of involvement in the damages caused; otherwise, they will be held liable. The ruling highlights the necessity for operators to ensure not only the safety of the roadway but also to be able to demonstrate their diligence in the event of accidents.

Bianucci Law Firm