The Judgement No. 473/2010, of July 15, 2010, the Civil Division of Supreme Court recognizes the right to compensation of 150 euros per person for passengers of vehicles were blocked by snow that fell AP-1, Burgos-Armiñón, 27 and 28 February 2004.
A) The Chamber 1 TS confirmed the ruling admitting the claim filed by the Association of Users plaintiff, declaring the liability of the company now relapsing-Europe, the concessionaire for the operation of the AP-1, by damages that are derived by the court that there was movement on the road maintained by it, 27 and February 28, 2004. Does not face "an unpredictable course of traffic accidents and highway collapsed inevitable given the adverse weather conditions" because of snow or ice are predictable in winter conditions, so the appellant was attributable to lack of foresight of eventualities could occur with the reporting worsening weather conditions.
Declares that there is a causal link between the incidents suffered by users of the highway and the failure of the appellant's duty of care imposed extreme Law 8 / 1972 of 10 May, highways, for traffic and accidents that occurred were due to the aforementioned lack of foresight and lack of information provided to drivers, which if given, would have allowed, if not avoid, if you reduce the results produced. So, it is ordered to pay compensation for moral damage suffered by the victims and set, as many to satisfy every one of them, the amount of 150 euros.
B) The lawsuit claimed by both the pecuniary damage, the situation of distress, worry and even in some cases the inability to obtain food for each of those affected, as in respect of property damage, for the damage resulting from the unjust retention during the 17 hours or so that prevented many people comply with the normal conduct of its activities (workshops, meetings, classes) establishing the basis for its calculation: an average of eight hours of implementing the cost effective hourly wage (11.07 euros) issued on December 18, 2003 by the National Institute Statistics, increased by 50%, you get the amount for damages for the concept of 132.84 euros.
TS statements have recognized that the moral harm is a difficult concept (STS May 22, 1995), relative and imprecise (SSTS December 14, 1996 and October 5, 1998). Started their compensation in the tort field, expanded its scope to the contract (SS. May 9, 1984, July 27, 1994, November 22, 1997, May 14 and July 12, 1999, etc.), adopting an increasingly broad guidance , clearly exceeding the stringent criteria that restricted its application to the classical conception of "pain and suffering" and attacks the rights of personality (S. October 19, 1998). Still true that more numerous assumptions are manifested in relation to interference in the honor and intimacy (which has legislative recognition), attacks on the professional prestige (Case February 28, 9 and 14 December 1994 and October 21, 1996), intellectual property (also with legal regulation), health responsibility (Case May 22, 1995, January 27, 1997, December 28, 1998 and September 27, 1999) and tort (accidents resulting in injury, sequelae and death), but would then be covered several cases in which openness is significant criterion (on the basis of the principle of indemnity), now in the field of neighbors or abuse of the right (S. July 27, 1994), now with generative cause a breach of contract (SS. July 12, 1999, November 18, 1998, November 22, 1997, May 20 and October 21, 1996), which, without however, can not think of a generalization of the possibility of compensation.
The basic situation that can occur in a moral harm compensable is suffering or mental condition (Case 22 May 1995, October 19, 1996 and September 24, 1999). The recent Court has referred to various situations, among which include the impact or psychic or spiritual suffering (S. July 23, 1990), impotence, anxiety, anxiety, distress (S. July 6, 1990), anxiety, mood and feeling of anxiety, grief, fear or premonition of uncertainty (S. May 22, 1995), anxiety disorder, emotional impact, resulting uncertainty (S. January 27, 1998), shock, grief or psychological stress (S. July 12, 1999).
C) With respect to the claim for property damage for those who have paid the toll, the lawsuit claimed a linear amount of 28 euros per vehicle is calculated taking into account the various reviews on the rate depending on the route, and partly an average of 14? per vehicle and calculates that based on twice the amount paid, ie 28 euros claimed. The defendant opposed the concept of abstraction called, not knowing how to obtain the amount claimed. However, even knowing that the segment most affected by a hold, in both senses of the movement was that of Miranda - Pancorbo, must be compensated with a uniform amount to all consumers and users, the toll for the section Armiñón -Burgos, according to different categories of vehicles, according to the rate schedule applicable on January 1, 2004 (page 211), as the TS understands that if the information provided by the highway users would have been adequate, even with restricted circulation, destroys the vehicles will enter in circulatory collapse which prevented them from escaping by either highway exits. Similarly, the allowance shall for those affected with the condition of consumers or users, according to Article 1 of Law 26/1984 and avail themselves of the highway between the 16 hours until the official closure of the highway (approximately 19 hours on ) on 27 February 2004.
D) As Europe recognizes this is not a fortuitous event or force majeure is a legal matter in which the factors of consumer law and public nature, and generalized regular service have evolved accountability system to a quasi-objectification objectification it would be irrelevant the existence or otherwise of these assumptions in the face of the statement of responsibility in Europe.
Indeed, since the main rule of consumption (LCU, Article 25), recognizes consumers and users the right to compensation for damages that the consumption of goods or the use of products or services are incurred, created as only cause of exclusion that was involved in the production of the damage its sole negligence or people from which to respond civilly. There
case law stating that the contractual relationship between the concessionaire a highway and the user of the first obligation imposed on the extreme diligence to ensure adequate security conditions on the characteristics of the process of that nature, designed for rapid movement of vehicles (SSTS July 30, 2008, RC No. 616/2002, December 19, 1995, CR No. 2085/1992, May 5, 1998, CR No. 916/1994, 6 May 2004, SR No. 1971/1998, January 27, 2006, SR No. 2244/1999, April 15, 2009, CR No. 1191/2004). Established
causal link for the appeal decision from the default of its obligations by the concessionaire and the result produced it only remains on appeal the power to examine whether the complaint properly verified damage objective entity that requires responsibility as the objective imputation, which integrates a quaestio iuris [legal issue], involves a trial that, beyond the mere finding of physical causation to be measured using criteria drawn from the legal system can be charged against the damage caused to the agent appreciating the proximity of the conduct performed, the scope of protection of the rule infringed, and the frequency or normality of the risk created against the existence of the general risks of life, among other circumstances.
From this perspective, the trial of complaint verified by the appeal decision conforms correctly to a rigorous standard of care taken of the obligations imposed on the concessionaire by the Highway Act. It is true that we offer as the meteorological conditions relevant circumstances, the conduct of drivers, the emergence of an unusual number of heavy vehicles on the highway, the accidents suffered by any of them, the abandonment of heavy vehicles by their drivers and inappropriate intervention of the authority, but these factors are not sufficient to eliminate the Causation of damage to the dealership.
The extreme care required to ensure adequate security conditions on the characteristics of the process of that nature, designed for rapid movement of vehicles is not consistent with the facts that are deducted from the account of the facts verifying judgment, encrypted, essentially, a lack of anticipation of adverse weather conditions, but predictable in the winter when there were, in fact no such conditions have intensified in monitoring point where the conflict occurred, especially complex for road traffic, in the insufficient information provided to drivers; lack of coordination with the administrative authority and reprehensible in itself, largely attributable to the lack of media available to the concessionaire of the highway, because they were unfit to meet extraordinary situations and did not have specific character for communication with the Administration.
Faced with these circumstances are very minor significance in the order of Causation, the factors that the appellant notes, consisting basically of the unpredictability of weather complications, in an extraordinary number of vehicles in improper conduct of drivers and lack of restrictive measures taken by the Administration.
.
0 comments:
Post a Comment