Introduction:

In matters of extracontractual liability of the State, the processes of direct reparation that have been derived from facts on the occasion of the CAI have generated changes in the categories of protection that have been transforming especially since the existence of the CAI is recognized. Objective: The main objective of this research is to determine which are the conditions that have been assessed by the Council of State to establish the adequacy of the title of imputation and the conditions of interpretation of the categories of antijuridical damage and the responsibility of the State.

Materials and Methods:

The study was delimited from the documentary review of a random selection of sentences of the Council of State taken in a non-probabilistic way through the categories of the titles of imputation that were presented in a chronological reconstruction where the reference axis was contrasted in an analytical dimension of the recognition of the CAI.

Results:

the study evidenced how among the different titles of imputation applicable to facts of the internal armed conflict there are parameters that evidence a transition from institutional omission that allowed a margin of the conception of the antijuridical damage wide towards a more limited margin based on a more rigorous development of the principle of legality.

Conclusions:

The declaration of the internal armed conflict had a great impact on the way tort liability was developed, which by providing new categories of protection generated more legal certainty but limited broad interpretations of tort.

        · resumo em Português | Espanhol     · texto em Espanhol     · Espanhol ( pdf )