The plaintiff argued that the water ingress was due to the poor condition of the public sidewalk, specifically the lifting of the pavement caused by tree roots. According to their account, this situation created a slope that facilitated rainwater entry into the property.
However, the judge found insufficient evidence to demonstrate a direct relationship between the state of the public road and the damages suffered. After analyzing expert reports and graphic documentation, the ruling concludes that there was no proof of an inverted slope or a significant defect in the sidewalk attributable to the Administration.
The most probable cause of the leaks lies in the premises' own characteristics, located at street level and lacking protective elements — such as a step or barrier — to prevent water entry during heavy rain episodes.
The court also noted that, although a minor defect was detected in a section of the sidewalk possibly linked to roots, it was not located next to the property's entrance nor was it significant enough to justify the alleged damages. Therefore, the resolution dismisses the City Council's patrimonial responsibility in this case.
Despite the dismissal, the judge decided not to impose legal costs on either party, considering that there were reasonable doubts during the litigation. The judgment is final and not subject to ordinary appeal.
