Liability for things in custody: commentary on judgment Cass. civ., Ord., no. 2480/2018
Civil liability for damages arising from things in custody is a topic of significant importance in Italian law, especially when it comes to road accidents. The judgment of the Court of Cassation no. 2480 of 2018 provides significant insights into how to interpret and apply Article 2051 of the Civil Code, which governs the matter. In this article, we will analyze the salient points of this judgment and the principles that derive from it.
The case under review
The appeal concerns the liability of ANAS for the death of a young man who, due to losing control of his moped, plunged into a ravine. The Court of Appeal had excluded ANAS's liability, holding that the guardrail complied with current regulations and that the accident was due to factors unrelated to the custody of the road. The appellants, on the other hand, argued that ANAS should have adopted more stringent safety measures.
Principles of liability
Liability for things in custody on the part of the owner and manager of the road, equipped with a guardrail of legal height, for damages suffered by the driver of a vehicle who had lost control of it, for an unknown reason, is excluded.
The Court reiterated that liability under art. 2051 of the Civil Code is objective, requiring the injured party to prove the causal link between the thing in custody and the damage suffered. However, it is up to the custodian to prove that the damage was not caused by the thing, but by an act of God. In the present case, the Court held that the conduct of the injured party played an exclusive causal role in the accident, excluding the liability of the road management body.
- Objective liability: the custodian is liable for damages caused by the thing in custody.
- Causal link: the injured party must prove the relationship between the thing and the damage.
- Exclusion of liability for act of God: the custodian must demonstrate the absence of liability.
Conclusions
Judgment Cass. no. 2480/2018 clarifies important aspects of liability for damages from things in custody. It emphasizes the importance of the causal link and the role of the injured party's conduct in the analysis of liability. In a context where greater attention to safety measures is required, this decision remains crucial for understanding how liabilities can be attributed in the event of road accidents.
