The events date back to November 1, 2022, when the plaintiff’s daughter, who was being walked by her mother, He fell out of his wheelchair when he reached the crosswalk. existing between Isla Fuerteventura and Cantábrico streets and the chair overturned due to the existing unevenness at the junction of the sidewalk and the road, which in turn was deteriorated, so he fell to the ground. For the injuries suffered, he claims the amount that the judge now forces to pay to the City Council, which is considered responsible for the state of the pavement.

Defense of the City Council

The City Council, however, and in the same terms as the co-defendant insurer, opposed the claim on the grounds that The specific way in which the accident occurred is not proven.in addition to there being no causal relationship with the public service, taking into account the proximity of the plaintiff’s residence to the place of the events, and that it had maintained the same configuration since it was built.

The judge understands that the discussion revolves around the existence of causal relationship between the public service and the damage suffered and adds that doubts about the dynamics of the accident or the specific point at which it occurred cannot be shared, since it has always been maintained that It was a gap between the pedestrian crossing and the sidewalk, which was identified by the Local Police and by the Public Roads maintenance unit in their respective reports.

The reason for the fall is proven

Likewise, the judge considers it proven that the fall occurred when he reached the pedestrian crossing, that is, when he began to cross it, and not when he got on the sidewalk, once he had crossed it, something that is also evident in the Vía Pública report. which describes defects in the meeting between the road and the sidewalk at the point where the pedestrian crossing is located, such as lack of paint in two areas, existence of a 1 cm gap between the road ending slab and the asphalt. and that the height of the curb with respect to the road, which has not changed since its construction, is 3.5 cm. “These are not slopes that are distant from each other, so that once the first one has been successfully overcome, the next one could be safely approached. All of them are located at the meeting of a zebra crossing and a curb, and should allow passage without the danger of a wheelchair user, whose reduced ability to maneuver will not need to be explained.the version that the appellant’s mother offers, in a simple but forceful way, is totally credible. in his witness statement, regarding the wheels, after lowering the chair down the steep 3.5 cm slope of the curb, remained stucks with the immediate irregularities that represented both the lack of paint on the strips of the passage and, above all, the meeting of the asphalt and the slab at the end of the road, and it overturned,” the ruling states.