Civil liability and custody of things: Cass. n. 31949 of 2023

The recent ordinance of the Court of Cassation, no. 31949 of November 16, 2023, raises important issues regarding civil liability in case of damages arising from things in custody. The case in question involves A.A., who suffered damage to his car due to a wheel detaching from a semi-trailer on the highway. The Cassation ruling offers significant insights into the assessment of the burden of proof and the causal link, crucial elements in such disputes.

The case and the judges' decisions

The Court of Genoa had initially recognized the liability of Autostrade per l'Italia (ASPI) pursuant to art. 2051 of the Italian Civil Code, ordering the company to compensate for damages. However, the Court of Appeal of Genoa upheld ASPI's appeal, arguing that the Court had not adequately assessed the circumstances of the case. Hence, A.A.'s appeal to the Court of Cassation, which raised several grounds, all based on the violation of legal norms.

The legal issues raised

One of the central points of the ruling is the burden of proof. The Court of Cassation reiterated that, under art. 2051 of the Italian Civil Code, the custodian of a thing is liable for damages caused by it, unless they prove that the change in original conditions was sudden and intervention was impossible. In this case, the Court highlighted that the Court of Appeal had erroneously reversed the burden of proof, placing a greater evidentiary burden on the injured party than that provided by law.

The Court of Cassation established that it is the custodian's responsibility to demonstrate the absence of liability, not the injured party's responsibility to prove the custodian's fault.

Practical implications of the ruling

The implications of this ruling are relevant for all those operating in the road traffic and civil liability sector. The Cassation decision not only reaffirms established principles but also clarifies how the circumstances of the specific case should be assessed. In particular:

• The custodian's liability is presumed and can only be contested through concrete evidence.
• It is essential for road management companies to ensure adequate surveillance services, especially in adverse environmental conditions.
• The causal link must be demonstrated with clear evidence and cannot be based on conjecture.

Conclusions

Ruling no. 31949 of 2023 represents an important step in the jurisprudential path concerning civil liability for damages from things in custody. It offers clear guidance on how to apply art. 2051 of the Italian Civil Code and on the burden of proof, essential aspects to consider in any dispute related to road traffic. Companies, in particular, should learn from this case to improve their surveillance and risk management procedures.