Road accidents can be a traumatic experience for all those involved, and the determination of guilt and consequent compensation can be a long and complicated process. In most cases, the question of who is to blame for a road accident will determine who is responsible for the damage or injury suffered in the accident. When a person is found guilty, he may be responsible for paying compensation to those affected by the accident. Knowing what to do after a road accident and how the blame is determined can help those affected to receive fair compensation.
When it comes to accidents, there are many factors that can contribute to a road accident. These include climatic conditions, road design, vehicle maintenance, driver behavior, and more. It is important to understand that various parties can share responsibility for an accident, so determining who was to blame can be difficult. Generally speaking, negligence by one or more parties often plays a role in road accidents – meaning that someone was not taking reasonable care when operating their vehicle or otherwise contributed to the incident.
In order to take legal action following a road accident, the responsible party must be identified and held responsible for its actions. This process usually involves working with law enforcement officers, as well as law professionals who have experience in assessing accident scenes and determining negligence. Once guilt has been determined through this process, individuals can request appropriate compensation from those responsible for the damage caused by the road accident.
Only the sole guilt of the injured person in the road accident exempts the driver of the other vehicle and his insurer from civil liability
In the event of a car accident, only the sole guilt of the injured exempts the driver of the other vehicle and his insurance company from civil liability. This means that if it can be proven, beyond reasonable doubt, that the injured person is the only one guilty of his injuries, he will not be able to claim compensation for damages from any other source. However, this does not mean that the injured party cannot claim compensation if there are factors that have contributed to the other vehicle being responsible; in such cases, responsibility can be shared between both parties involved.
Whatever the situation may be, it is normal for the insurer of either party to pay the compensation that any of them request. Ultimately, only if it can be confirmed beyond any doubt that the injured party to the road accident is fully responsible will it be unable to request damage or remuneration.
The Supreme Court recently handed down a ruling in support of the motorist who had been denied compensation for injuries sustained in an accident when the motorbike on which he was travelling struck a car that had just crossed the road.
The motorist took legal action against the insurer of this vehicle, who refused to pay him, claiming that the road accident was only his mistake.
The courts proved the insurer right, relying on the Civil Guard’s attestation which pointed to the origin of the road accident at the inappropriate speed of the motorist for the type of road, on a curved stage and with a careless driving.
The motorist felt aggravated by this assessment and appealed to the Supreme Court (TS). In his appeal he argued that while driving on the main road, he had not adequately stated whether it was safe to pass; consequently, it could not be concluded that he was solely responsible for the road accident. He therefore considered that his claim to compensation should be fully or partially recognised depending on whether both drivers were considered responsible.
For the TS, in the face of a sinister accident that has occurred at an intersection of roads, where the motorcyclist was travelling on the preferred road, while the motorcyclist was travelling on a secondary route, in which, moreover, there was a stop signal regulating the crossing, it seems clear that the driver of tourism is creating an objective situation of danger, so that the most prudent would have been, seeing the motorcyclist, to let him through, which would only take a few seconds, and not to make the introduction of the motorway any easier.
In this way, it not only rules out the sole guilt of the motorist, but also considers the driver of tourism to be the sole culprit of the road accident. It concludes that it is in cases such as this that, literally says the TS, ‘the socialisation of evil acquires a genuine charter of nature, in order to serve the intended purpose of compensating for the damage caused by these instruments of progress, such as motor vehicles, which are an indisputable source of risks, through compulsory insurance under a risk-taking regime’.
If you are affected by a situation similar to this one, our office is available to you for any doubts that may arise in this regard. We can give you legal advice on the best way forward, as well as on the types of compensation to which you may be entitled. In addition, we can represent him in court proceedings if necessary. We will ensure that their interests are protected throughout the process. Do not hesitate to contact us if you need more information or assistance.