Civil liability on motorways: analysis of Cass. Civ., Ord. no. 33128/2024

The recent ordinance of the Court of Cassation, Section III, no. 33128 of December 18, 2024, offers important food for thought on the civil liability of motorway companies. In this specific case, A. A. had his car's windscreen damaged by an unidentified object on the roadway. The Court examined the various aspects of contractual and tortious liability, highlighting the need for a correct assessment of the causal link between the event and the custodian's conduct.

The case of A. A. v. Autostrada BS-VR-VI-PD Spa

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

The reasoning of the Court of Cassation

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

The Court upheld the third and fourth grounds of appeal, emphasizing that the liability of the owner or concessionaire of motorways is contractual in 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 cases of damage caused by external factors. The Court pointed out that the Court of Padua's judgment had not adequately analysed the causal link, limiting itself to hypothesizing other possible causes that were not supported by concrete evidence.

Legal implications of the ruling

• The contractual liability of the motorway operator is equated to that of the custodian of an object.
• It is the custodian's burden to prove the unforeseeability and inevitability of the damaging event to exclude their liability.
• The principle of the preponderance of evidence must guide the judgment on causality, preventing the absence of certain proof 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 motorway companies, drawing attention to the need for an accurate assessment of evidence and circumstances in which damage occurs.

Conclusions

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