Negligent Arson and Liability: Commentary on Judgment No. 17208 of 2023

Judgment No. 17208 of April 4, 2023, represents an important ruling by the Court of Cassation regarding liability in cases of negligent arson due to violation of plant safety regulations. In particular, it clarifies how the role of the technical manager, appointed to ensure plant compliance, affects the configuration of the company owner's liability.

Regulatory Context

In this judgment, the Court refers to the regulatory provisions concerning plant safety, specifically Law No. 46 of 1990 and Ministerial Decree No. 37 of 2008. These regulations clearly establish responsibilities related to the installation and maintenance of heating systems, defining a framework of guarantees for user safety.

Negligent arson due to violation of plant safety regulations - Technical manager appointed by the company owner pursuant to art. 2, paragraph 2, Law No. 46 of 1990 and D.M. No. 37 of 2008 - Duty of care position - Existence - Conditions - Consequences. In cases of negligent arson due to violation of plant safety regulations, the appointment of a technical manager, responsible due to their expertise for the installation, transformation, and maintenance of domestic heating systems, who assumes an independent duty of care position under articles 2, paragraph 2, of Law No. 46 of March 5, 1990, and 3, paragraph 1, of D.M. No. 37 of January 22, 2008, does not allow for the co-liability of the company owner who, lacking the necessary technical expertise, merely signed the plant's declaration of conformity.

Liability of the Owner and the Technical Manager

The Court has established that the appointment of a designated technical manager, possessing the necessary expertise, implies that the company owner cannot be considered jointly liable in the event of fires caused by violations of safety regulations, provided that they themselves did not act negligently. This point is fundamental, as it clarifies that criminal liability cannot be automatically attributed to the owner if they have engaged a competent professional for plant management.

• The technical manager's duty of care position is independent and distinct.
• The company owner is responsible for appointing a competent technician.
• In case of regulatory violations, the specific conduct of the technical manager is assessed.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 17208 of 2023 offers important food for thought for all parties involved in the management of heating systems. It emphasizes the importance of technical expertise and the correct allocation of responsibilities, outlining a clear regulatory framework to avoid confusion in cases of negligent arson. It is therefore essential for companies to engage qualified professionals to ensure not only compliance with regulations but also user safety and legal protection in the event of damaging incidents.