Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (EFE) in trouble in Tebeto, a beach without a lifeguard and classified as dangerous, but in which there was not even a sign warning of its risks.
The sentence, advanced by the SER chain, turns around a previous resolution of the Contentious Administrative Court number 1 of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, which maintained that the City Council could not be blamed for the death of Arturo FB, which occurred on 15 April 2020, between 3:30 p.m. and 3:50 p.m.
The judge who resolved this litigation in the first instance recognized that the Consistory had breached its legal obligation to warn citizens about the danger of that beach by prohibiting bathing on it, but qualified that the one who drowned was not the bather surprised by the harshness of the waves -who managed to get out of the water-, but rather a resident of the island who took the risk of jumping in to help her.
And, from his point of view, that broke the “causal link” necessary to make the La Oliva Town Hall financially responsible for the damages caused by the death of Arturo FB to his wife, his son and his father.
According to his thesis, if the drowned woman had been the bather, it could be concluded that she died as a result of a malfunction of the public services, but since the man who wanted to save her was the person who lost her life, it could be argued that he assumed the risks involved that ransom and was guilty of his own death.
The TSJC disagrees flatly. “If we admit that the deceased acted with guilt”, the magistrates that make up the Chamber respond, we would also have to admit that the correct conduct was to watch from the shore how the bather drowned.”
The Chamber applies the same solution to this case that it gave to another very similar one that occurred in Mogán (Gran Canaria) in 2012, and adds the circumstances that, in its opinion, make the La Oliva City Council patrimonially responsible for that death.
“Don Arturo”, reasons the court, “did not have the means to know and gauge the magnitude of the danger he assumed when he jumped into the sea to save a person in danger. He made a noble decision, but not the right one due to the lack of the necessary information, such as a red flag or danger signs, that would alert him to the real danger that exists ”.
For this reason, it rules that there is “full responsibility for the harmful result of the La Oliva City Council, owner of the service”, because “the beach, on the day of the death of Mr. Arturo, was open to the bathroom without any warning about the dangerous state of the sea; It did not wave any red flag of danger, nor was it closed to users. EFE