The Provincial Court of Valencia has upheld the exoneration of the municipal technician involved in the 2022 Mislata inflatable tragedy, rejecting an appeal by the parents of one of the two girls who died. The ruling leaves the technician outside the criminal proceedings, while the case continues against the attraction’s two owners and the engineer who designed its installation.
The accident occurred on January 4, 2022, during Mislata’s Christmas fair, when a strong gust lifted and overturned the “Humor amarillo, la selva” inflatable on Carrer de l’Escultor Miquel Navarro. Children were thrown from the attraction. Contemporary reports said nine minors were affected; an eight-year-old girl later died in hospital, bringing the death toll to two. An eyewitness described the sudden movement: “Suddenly I saw the inflatable lift and the children in the air; some fell onto the inflatables next to it.”
The incident prompted a criminal investigation into the attraction’s installation and operation, its engineering documentation and the municipality’s oversight. Proceedings continued against the two owners and the engineer over alleged gross negligence. In the case, the municipal technician’s role was to review documents filed with the responsible declaration, including the engineer’s certificate, rather than carry out ongoing physical inspections of the attraction.
The parents of Vera, one of the victims, challenged the technician’s exoneration. They argued that the required responsible declaration for the Christmas fair had not been filed, that no report from an Organismo de Certificación Administrativa (OCA) had been provided, and that the paperwork referred to a different event and location. The court concluded that the applicable rules did not require an OCA certificate for the installation. It also found that the municipal authority was not obliged to inspect the attraction if the required documents had been submitted.
Expert reports cited in the case linked the accident to the force of the wind and inadequate anchoring. They also noted the poor condition of the securing straps and the inflatable’s placement at a location different from the one specified in the engineer’s project. The court considered these matters outside the technician’s duties, which were limited to reviewing the submitted documentation.
The ruling also referred to a 2019 consultation between Mislata City Council and the regional Agency for Security and Emergency Response. The agency said installations of this kind could operate from the day a responsible declaration was filed, without further formalities. It added that the municipality could inspect such attractions, but was not required to do so unless defects were detected or suspected.
The regional structure for certain public activities and establishments includes Law 14/2010 of the Valencian Community, which provides for responsible declarations and, in specified circumstances, administrative certification. The court’s decision addressed how the rules applied to the documentation and municipal technician in this case. Separate criminal proceedings against the owners and engineer remain focused on the circumstances surrounding the attraction’s installation and operation.
Official responsibility and oversight in public-safety incidents have also been debated in other contexts in Spain. For example, a recent case in Madrid involving a serial impostor posing as a Guardia Civil highlighted the challenges authorities face in ensuring compliance and public trust in regulatory processes.
The court found insufficient grounds to pursue criminal charges against the municipal technician, while proceedings against the attraction’s owners and engineer continue. The ruling distinguishes the technician’s review of submitted paperwork from the safety of the installation itself, including its anchoring, securing straps and placement. The case has renewed attention to how safety responsibilities are divided among private operators, technical professionals and municipal authorities at temporary fairground attractions.
