9621 Agnes Crossing, Lake Suzanneview, New Mexico Island 84604-9295.
In order not to provoke a serious traffic incident, it is not enough to ‘drive without hurting someone’. You must also follow the requirements of the signs. Ignoring
The accident, which became a subject of consideration by the Supreme Court, occurred on February 22, 2022 in the town of Nyagan, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug. On that day, around 6 p.m., at the intersection of Peter the Great and Dekabristov streets, a Hyundai Solaris and a UAZ Patriot collided. A domestic SUV crossed the intersection moving forward along the street named after the Russian Tsar. At that moment, the girl made a left turn in her Korean car – clearly on the trajectory of the UAZ.
The traffic police officers who arrived on the scene concluded that the accident occurred because the Hyundai driver did not yield to the Patriot pilot. Guided by this conclusion, the citizen was fined 1,000 rubles. 2 tablespoons. 12.13 Code of Administrative Offenses – did not yield when passing an intersection.
However, the story didn’t end there. The girl felt the punishment was unfair and challenged the protocol in court. At first instance – the municipal court – the decision of the traffic police inspector was upheld. However, the Seventh Court of Cassation of General Jurisdiction overturned this decision and closed the case “for lack of an administrative offense.” That is, I came to the conclusion that the UAZ driver was responsible for the accident. A fine of 1000 rubles is not God knows what kind of punishment by the standards of “northern” salaries.
The nuance is that the small Solaris was severely damaged by the impact of the heavy Patriot. And in such cases, the party responsible for the accident is obliged to “pay the banquet”. This prospect did not please the “Uaz driver” and now he went to file a complaint with higher judicial authorities. However, the Supreme Court refused to satisfy him.
It turned out that the intersection of Dekabristov and Peter the Great streets in Nyagan is completely monitored by traffic police cameras. And from the recording of the accident it is clear that the UAZ “Patriot” enters the intersection from the far left lane. Which is only intended for turning left. While driving in a straight direction, his driver violated the sign requirements.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court referred to the resolution of the plenary meeting of the Supreme Court of June 25, 2019. It states that a driver who violates traffic rules does not have priority at the intersection. Other road users are therefore not obliged to give way. Because the driver of the Patriot did not comply with the requirements of the sign, the girl in the Solaris, who was turning left from the opposite direction, should not have yielded to him. So it is the owner of the domestic car that was driving in the forward direction who is responsible for the accident. And he is the one who is obliged to compensate the damage to the second participant in the accident.
The accident, which became a subject of consideration by the Supreme Court, occurred on February 22, 2022 in the town of Nyagan, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug. On that day, around 6 p.m., at the intersection of Peter the Great and Dekabristov streets, a Hyundai Solaris and a UAZ Patriot collided. A domestic SUV crossed the intersection moving forward along the street named after the Russian Tsar. At that moment, the girl made a left turn in her Korean car – clearly on the trajectory of the UAZ.
The traffic police officers who arrived on the scene concluded that the accident occurred because the Hyundai driver did not yield to the Patriot pilot. Guided by this conclusion, the citizen was fined 1,000 rubles. 2 tablespoons. 12.13 Code of Administrative Offenses – did not yield when passing an intersection.
However, the story didn’t end there. The girl felt the punishment was unfair and challenged the protocol in court. At first instance – the municipal court – the decision of the traffic police inspector was upheld. However, the Seventh Court of Cassation of General Jurisdiction overturned this decision and closed the case “for lack of an administrative offense.” That is, I came to the conclusion that the UAZ driver was responsible for the accident. A fine of 1000 rubles is God does not know what kind of punishment according to the standards of “northern” salaries.
The nuance is that the small Solaris was severely damaged by the impact of the heavy Patriot. And in such cases, the party responsible for the accident is obliged to “pay the banquet”. This prospect did not please the “Uaz driver” and now he went to file a complaint with higher judicial authorities. However, the Supreme Court refused to satisfy him.
It turned out that the intersection of Dekabristov and Peter the Great streets in Nyagan is completely monitored by traffic police cameras. And from the recording of the accident it is clear that the UAZ “Patriot” enters the intersection from the far left lane. Which is only intended for turning left. While driving in a straight direction, his driver violated the sign requirements.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court referred to the resolution of the plenary meeting of the Supreme Court of June 25, 2019. It states that a driver who violates traffic rules does not have priority at the intersection. Other road users are therefore not obliged to give way. Because the driver of the Patriot did not comply with the requirements of the sign, the girl in the Solaris, who was turning left from the opposite direction, should not have yielded to him. So it is the owner of the domestic car that was driving in the forward direction who is responsible for the accident. And he is the one who is obliged to compensate the damage to the second participant in the accident.
Source: Avto Vzglyad
Donald Salinas is an experienced automobile journalist and writer for Div Bracket. He brings his readers the latest news and developments from the world of automobiles, offering a unique and knowledgeable perspective on the latest trends and innovations in the automotive industry.
