The responsibility of the administration is assessed when the damage to, for example, a vehicle is caused by the loosening of a granite ball placed as a post on the sidewalk, rolls down and hits the vehicle.
In the streets of the big cities, there are more and more bollards with the main purpose of limiting the access or passage of vehicles to prohibited areas. As an urban element, its characteristics are regulated, so if it does not comply with the regulations, and therefore
damage has occurred to our vehiclethere is always the possibility to claim the administration responsible for the installation as they explain ABC from Pyramid Consulting.
The regulation can be found in Royal Decree 505/2007 of April 20, which develops the technical document of the basic accessibility and non-discrimination conditions for access and use of urbanized public spaces and in Order VIV/561/2010 of February 1. This is detailed by the advisor’s legal department.
Likewise, they also indicate that their characteristics are included in Article 29 of the above-mentioned Decree, which provides that “the height of those who are in pedestrian areas shall be between 0.75 and 0.90 m, the minimum width and diameter will be 10. cm and rounded design without borders, the color should contrast with the road surface all over the piece or at least in the upper part so that it can be seen at night; and as far as their location is concerned, they will be on a placed in an aligned manner and under no circumstances may they enter the accessible pedestrian route or reduce their width at intersections or other points along the route.
Knowing all its characteristics, numerous questions arise in this regard: can the administration be responsible in case of damage to vehicles or persons? Are the consequences the same regardless of the goal of the post?
The experts consulted assure that when assessing the potential responsibility of the administrations, “it should be taken into account that a series of requirements established by the doctrine for the origin of public administration’s property responsibility: the reality of a harmful result; the illegality of the damage or injury, given the qualification of this concept, both because the author’s conduct is contrary to the law and, above all, because the person who suffers it does not have a legal duty to a matter to be resolved in each case specified in concrete terms Also the imputability of the harmful activity to the Administration thanks to the integration of the agent in the framework of the administrative organization to which he belongs Or the direct and exclusive causal link between the administrative activity and the harmful result.The damage must be the exclusive g result from the normal or abnormal functioning of a public service or administrative activity; and absence of force majeure.
Therefore, “it is necessary that the above requirements are met in order to claim this responsibility from the administration”.
In the case of bollards, first of all, as stated in Opinion No. 41/12 of the Permanent Commission of the Advisory Council of the Community of Madrid, unanimously issued at its meeting on 25 January 2012, taking into account determining the possible responsibility of the administration, if the purpose of the bollards is to prevent the entry of cars from pedestrian areas or if they were simply intended to decorate or distinguish sections of the road. In the case where the purpose is merely graceful, the cause would be justified by what, if not imputable to the administration negligence or acts, in principle its responsibility would hardly be justifiable.
Another example where the responsibility always lies with the driver or hardly ever lies with the administration is when the damage occurs when the driver does not respect the indications on the road signs and has entered the road incorrectly.
In the case of damage to vehicles, the responsibility of the administration is assessed when the damage to, for example, a vehicle is caused by the loosening of a granite ball placed as a bollard on the pavement, which rolls down and hits the vehicle. .
The responsibility is produced by the mechanism of “la culpa in vigilando” of the Municipal Council by omitting the proper inspection of the public road, being responsible for all the elements that are in the municipal spaces in the right conditions. This criterion is established, inter alia, in the judgment of the Supreme Court of Madrid, the Disputes Administrative Chamber, Section 2, judgment of 23.01.2007.
Another case in which the administration’s responsibility was assessed was the collision of a vehicle against a bollard placed on the road by the municipality. They also cite another example where a driver’s vehicle was damaged by the impact of a retractable bollard on its underside, and the administration’s responsibility was estimated.
Source: La Verdad
I am Ida Scott, a journalist and content author with a passion for uncovering the truth. I have been writing professionally for Today Times Live since 2020 and specialize in political news. My career began when I was just 17; I had already developed a knack for research and an eye for detail which made me stand out from my peers.