Glass fell on the car: the court in Saratov did not side with the driver

The First Court of Cassation of General Jurisdiction published the information in its max channel. These are the rules of compensation. In the presence of gross negligence in the actions of the victim, the amount of compensation for damage is reduced.

The plaintiff owned the vehicle and left the vehicle near the production building. A glass fell on the car. The plaintiff sued. The defendant was an open joint stock company. This organization owns the building. The plaintiff demanded to recover 142 300 rubles. This money was intended for compensation for damage to the vehicle.

The court of first instance heard the case. He found that the glass fell on the plaintiff's car. The court also confirmed the damage to the car. As a result, the claims of the plaintiff were satisfied in full.

The Court of Appeal reviewed the decision. He changed the first instance order. The amount to be recovered has been reduced. The appeal found gross negligence in the driver's actions. It was expressed in the placement of the vehicle in undesignated territory. The car was under a prohibited information message. This contributed to the harm.

The first court of cassation of general jurisdiction agreed with the decision of the appellate instance. Cassation noted the following. With due diligence and care, the driver had a real opportunity to avoid causing mechanical damage. To that end, it should have properly assessed the specific circumstances and respected the established prohibition on the placement of vehicles. Such a basis for reducing the amount of compensation for harm is provided for by paragraph 2 of Article 1083 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

The appeal ruling remains unchanged.