Violation of the duty of surveillance and maintenance is the municipality also liable in the case of an accident occurring on a neighbouring road?

The caseA woman, in order to help her husband manoeuvre back onto the carriageway, fell into the manhole left open, sustaining serious personal injuries. The Court of Cassation, in judgment No. 8879 of 2023, confirmed the liability of the municipality under Articles 2051 and 2043 of the Civil Code, despite the fact that the accident occurred on a privately owned road.

Grounds for the decisionAccording to the judges of legitimacy, in relation to neighbouring roads, the municipality is liable for their custody, provided that they are included among the roads used for public transit. This follows from Article 2, paragraph 1, of the new Highway Code, which defines 'road' as 'an area for public use' and therefore does not depend on whether the property is publicly or privately owned; as well as from paragraph 6, which assimilates vicinal roads to municipal roads, despite the fact that the former are by definition privately owned. Therefore - in the opinion of the Supreme Court - on the subject of liability for negligent maintenance of roads, the Public Administration is at fault if it fails to maintain or make safe the areas, including private property, bordering the public roads, when they may cause danger to road users. It follows that in the case of damage caused by defective maintenance of a road 'the private nature of the road is not, in itself, sufficient to exclude the liability of the municipal administration where, by reason of the destination of the area and its objective conditions, it was required to maintain it'. For further details:Court of Cassation, judgment no. 8879 of 2023;Highway Code, art. 2, paragraphs 1 and 6.