A) The ruling of the 1st Civil Justice No 768/2010 of 26 November 2010 states that should be modulated the driver's responsibility in cases of traffic accidents in which cyclists is involved, these from the time they join the movement, take part in a conscious and risk created by driving motor vehicles.
The TS estimated that, necessarily, limited the defendant driver's liability for negligence of the victim due to an absence, but overall if partial, causal relationship between his behavior and the result produced, therefore, regardless of type appropriate compensation and the person to receive it. The TS maintains that in a system of accountability as envisaged in the LRCSVM, the principle of strict liability risk includes recognition of liability for damage by the driver of the vehicle which respectively caused it, now it has to be note that in the case of cyclists, from the moment they join the movement, take part and knowingly created risk by driving motor vehicles, that the law initially placed in charge of the truck driver; risk, which in the present case, finally materialized through the abuse of, being in their power to avoid it, circulating cyclist and where it did, could also help the truck driver, had been more cautious in discovering the presence of the rider on his right.
The TS estimated that, necessarily, limited the defendant driver's liability for negligence of the victim due to an absence, but overall if partial, causal relationship between his behavior and the result produced, therefore, regardless of type appropriate compensation and the person to receive it. The TS maintains that in a system of accountability as envisaged in the LRCSVM, the principle of strict liability risk includes recognition of liability for damage by the driver of the vehicle which respectively caused it, now it has to be note that in the case of cyclists, from the moment they join the movement, take part and knowingly created risk by driving motor vehicles, that the law initially placed in charge of the truck driver; risk, which in the present case, finally materialized through the abuse of, being in their power to avoid it, circulating cyclist and where it did, could also help the truck driver, had been more cautious in discovering the presence of the rider on his right.
B) Art. 1.1 LRCSVM de1995 I and II provides a method of allocating liability for personal injury caused by reason of the movement founded on the principle objective of creating risk for driving. The liability regime for damage resulting from its movement (Article 1.1 II LRCSVM 1995) only excludes the charge when it interferes in the causal chain the conduct or negligence of the injured (if the damage is due solely to them) or a force majeure misses driving and operation of the vehicle, except, in the first case, which also attend the driver's negligence, then proceeds as the equitable restraint and responsibility sharing of the cost of compensation (Article 1.1 LRCSVM IV 1995) ( SSTS 12 and December 16, 2008), declaring the STS 25 March 2010 that "The existence of negligent conduct by the injured person gives rise to a moderation in the driver's responsibility under Article 1.2 LRCSVM. This limitation is justified in that, based the driver's responsibility for damage to persons on the objective risk created by the movement (Article 1.1 LRCSVM), the legislature finds that the negligence of the injured is a matter to be judged objectively, which according to their degree of relevance, determines that the driver was not attributable in whole or in part the resulting damage (STS 12 December 2008, RC no. 2479/2002). "
In short, the limitation of responsibility driver's negligence of the victim due to a total or partial absence of a causal relationship between his behavior and the result produced, and therefore, affect the scope of civil liability arising from it, whatever the type of compensation from and the person to perceive .
C) In the case of TS understands the sentence proved that the movement was developing in adverse circumstances "rainy day with wind parallel movement of the two cyclists appreciation for those of red light to change green; narrowing of the road, acceptance of previous friction between cyclists absence circulation space, increase the passenger to continue the march to the island at his right, point of collision with the truck at the last semi-trailer with wheel, exceeded the row of vehicles including truck right, and that never stops. "Some of them affect to a greater or lesser extent the two parties involved in the accident as the adverse circumstances were for both truck drivers and cyclists, increasing the risk of circulation :
At first because it was not in any way exclude that the presence of cyclists on the road. In fact they did two right in overtaking maneuver vehicle stopped at the red traffic light signal. While it is true that little time could see them before starting off and making the left turn (from which I could not do it by drawing the track a slight bend enough for the tractor axis deviates longitudinal semi-trailer and set dead-sighted), so is that you can not shelter your circulatory conduct the maneuver performed by the bicyclist struck. The movement has undoubtedly complex circumstances, especially on some roads, from a combined presence of vehicles of different nature, potential and risk, along with cyclists, motorists, motorcyclists and the inevitable presence of pedestrians. They all create a foreseeable risk of harm, but used due care in its exercise, but in LRCSVM is attributed solely to motor vehicle driver.
D) any of these situations occurring have been contemplated in the jurisprudence of the Chamber 1 of TS, as the driver of the motor vehicle and a person outside the movement to establish a doctrine that "behavior driver for its quantitative and qualitative entity is determining cause of the collision, even when there is a causal contribution of the victim of poor organization or disproportionate to the driver of the vehicle Motor (STS 12 December 2008). Also, in cases of mutual collision between two vehicles stating the following: "the principle of strict liability risk includes recognition of liability for damage by the driver of the vehicle respectively caused it, it is clear that this assumption can not speak properly to compensate for faults, but can only examine the concurrence of causes in the production of the accident by drivers of vehicles involved. "
E) The cyclist, from the moment he joined the movement, took part and so aware of the risk created by driving motor vehicles that the law initially placed in charge of the truck driver. This risk finally materialized through its outrage, avoid being at your fingertips, circling the rider how and where it did, could also help the truck driver, had been more cautious in discovering the presence of the cyclist by right. In a system of accountability as envisaged in the LRCSVM, must necessarily limit the driver's responsibility for negligence of the victim due to an absence, but total, partial causal relationship between his behavior and the result produced, with clear reflection in the scope of liability arising from it, and then sets the decision of the 1. First Instance.
.
0 comments:
Post a Comment