In 2008, the mechanic was driving a Ferrari from Rome to Frosinone to sell it. An accident destroyed it.
But the man is only 50% responsible because the owner did not have an MOT. This is what the Court of Cassation ruled, rejecting the appeal presented by the owner of the car.
The court, noting that the Ferrari did not have the inspection, and despite the driver having been fined by the traffic police for speeding, established that the mechanic should be sentenced to pay compensation for damages only 50%. The owner, on the other hand, was placed, in co-responsibility, responsible for the vehicle for not having submitted the Ferrari to the mandatory inspection. The decision later confirmed by the Court of Appeal on the assumption that “allowing the vehicle to circulate, even without periodic inspection, constitutes a causal antecedent of the accident, to whose production also contributed the culpable conduct of the defendant”.
The owner took it well and took the case to the Supreme Court, highlighting the perfect state of maintenance of the Ferrari, Ciociaria Oggi reports , deeming the lack of inspection to have no causal impact on the accident. The Supreme Court, however, confirmed the decisions of the tribunal and the Court of appeal rejected the appeal. “It was correctly affirmed – wrote the Court of Cassation in its reasons – a contributory liability of the owner for having allowed the circulation of the vehicle, despite being aware that the same, due to the absence of the required inspection, could not be put into circulation”.
