This page has been automatically translated. Please refer to the page in French if needed.
Dangerous bathing
Mayor must warn of the dangers of beaches for the safety of swimmers
Publié le null - Directorate for Legal and Administrative Information (Prime Minister)
The mayor must always be clear about the dangers of publicly frequented bathing sites. This is recalled by the Council of State in its decision of 22 November 2019.
In the case cited, a surfer was the victim of a shark attack on Reunion Island less than 300 meters from the shore. He was surfing in the perimeter of a marine national nature reserve. He had to have his right hand and right leg amputated. It sought damages from the State, in order to compensate for the damage resulting from that accident. The Administrative Court and the Administrative Court of Appeal rejected his application. The victim then refers the matter to the Council of State.
The Council of State recalls that, by virtue of its powers as an administrative police, it is the duty of the mayor of the municipality to ensure the safety of bathers and water sports enthusiasts, such as surfing. This obligation is exercised in a marine band fixed at 300 meters from the shore. Otherwise, the mayor will be liable in the event of an accident and must report unusual hazards in both supervised and unsupervised bathing areas. The regulations must be posted in the town hall, and materialized on the beaches by signs placed near the places concerned. The information must indicate prohibited bathing and possible dangers: blocks of stone, violent sea currents, quicksand, rocks, sharks, etc.
In that case, the municipality's information did not specifically mention the risk associated with sharks on its maritime territory. But the Conseil d’État put the generality of municipal information into perspective in light of local Reunion circumstances. The threat of sharks was widely known, and the judges found that the victim was an experienced surfer who knew the area. The municipal decree stated that bathing on this site was prohibited and that access to it could only be at the risk of the persons concerned. A detailed and visible sign, settled on the site, alerted the reckless. In this case, the Prefect did not have to use his power of substitution.
The Conseil d’État dismisses the appeal brought by the interested parties.
Agenda
Impôts
À partir du 11 avr. 2024
Publié le 11 avril 2024
Prévention Covid-19
À partir du 15 avr. 2024
Publié le 18 mars 2024
Calendrier scolaire
Du 6 avr. au 12 mai 2024
Publié le 15 mars 2024