Owner's liability

Even though the premises were rented, the Supreme Court (TS) maintains the condemnation of the owners for the damages caused to the adjacent premises by water leaks. In this case, two people purchased in 2016 a premises intended for a bar in Valladolid and rented it out to different companies. The building was about 117 years old and the plumbing was largely old (only a part had been changed in a renovation in 2013). Between April and October 2017, leaks occurred in internal and hidden pipes of the premises, and these leaks ended up causing significant damage to the adjacent premises owned by a corporation.

The corporation claimed compensation. In first instance the owners were ordered to pay 63,605.14 euros; later, the Provincial Court reduced the amount to 44,523.60 euros, but maintained that the liability was of the owners due to lack of supervision and maintenance. The owners appealed to the TS stating, among other things, that a kind of “ automatic liability ” or a reversal of the burden of proof should not be applied.

The TS confirms the condemnation as the liability is based on the fault of art. 1902 CC, because it considers that the owners did not act with the required diligence in the maintenance of old facilities, especially when it comes to a premises intended for a bar. Furthermore, the TS clarifies that one cannot hide behind clauses of the rental contract that shift repairs to the tenant, against affected third parties (the neighbor), those clauses do not release them, at most they would allow to claim afterwards from the tenant . And it also rejects that here it is appropriate to shift the burden of proof, except in exceptional cases. The TS dismisses the appeal, confirms the compensation of 44,523.60 euros.