The plot of the lawsuit, which will be discussed, is simple: a certain resident of the Bryansk region drove her car along the Kletnya-Kharitonovka road. It was winter, and on the 15th kilometer of the highway, the car was pulled off the ice-covered asphalt into a ditch. Madame decided that the roadside assistance was responsible for the ice formation and the accident that had happened as a result and went to court with a lawsuit against the organization responsible for maintaining the route. In the first instance, however, it was decided that the aunt herself was to blame for the accident.
The local court ruled: “The driver’s actions did not comply with the traffic regulations, which led to the loss of stability and steerability of the car and, as a result, caused material damage to the plaintiff due to mechanical damage to the car. ” The result of the trial did not please the autolady and she appealed against it to higher courts. Ultimately, the First Court of Cassation of General Judiciary restored justice. At the meeting, a representative of the responding company confirmed that the road had not been treated with a sand-salt mixture on the day of the accident. According to him, it was snowing then, which made this procedure pointless.
In addition, in the case, the court found “no evidence of proper examination and verification of the conformity of the road surface on the disputed section of road with the requirements for ensuring road safety, which excludes the possibility of damage to the vehicle.” during its movement along the road, the maintenance of the road on the disputed section in accordance with established standards”.
Translated from Russian into law, this means: the organization that manages the road is obliged to maintain it in a suitable and normative state for traffic daily, 24 hours a day and in all weather conditions. In the context of this logic, the court ordered the road builders to reimburse the motorist for half of her repair costs on the damaged car. The second half ‘remained’ with the plaintiff because she herself showed negligence. She drove the car without considering all the risk factors in the current traffic situation. Thus, the citizen managed to at least partially compensate for her material damage resulting from an accident on a slippery road.
The plot of the lawsuit, which will be discussed, is simple: a certain resident of the Bryansk region drove her car along the Kletnya-Kharitonovka road. It was winter, and on the 15th kilometer of the highway, the car was pulled off the ice-covered asphalt into a ditch. Madame decided that the roadside assistance was responsible for the ice formation and the accident that had happened as a result and went to court with a lawsuit against the organization responsible for maintaining the route. In the first instance, however, it was decided that the aunt herself was to blame for the accident.
The local court ruled: “The driver’s actions did not comply with the traffic regulations, which led to the loss of stability and steerability of the car and, as a result, caused material damage to the plaintiff due to mechanical damage to the car. ” The result of the trial did not please the autolady and she appealed against it to higher courts. Ultimately, the First Court of Cassation of General Judiciary restored justice. At the meeting, a representative of the responding company confirmed that the road had not been treated with a sand-salt mixture on the day of the accident. According to him, it was snowing then, which made this procedure pointless.
In addition, in the case, the court found “no evidence of proper examination and verification of the conformity of the road surface on the disputed section of road with the requirements for ensuring road safety, which excludes the possibility of damage to the vehicle.” during its movement along the road, the maintenance of the road on the disputed section in accordance with established standards”.
Translated from Russian into law, this means: the organization that manages the road is obliged to maintain it in a suitable and normative state for traffic daily, 24 hours a day and in all weather conditions. In the context of this logic, the court ordered the road builders to reimburse the motorist for half of her repair costs on the damaged car. The second half ‘remained’ with the plaintiff because she herself showed negligence. She drove the car without considering all the risk factors in the current traffic situation. Thus, the citizen managed to at least partially compensate for her material damage resulting from an accident on a slippery road.
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.