Liability of vehicle owners will change in Belarus

October 20, MINSK . The House of Representatives adopted the bill “On Amendments to Codes” in the second reading. it provides for a number of comprehensive changes to the Civil Code. In particular, an important change concerns the civil liability of vehicle owners, chairperson of the Standing Committee on Legislation of the House of Representatives Svetlana Lyubetskaya told a BELTA correspondent.

“The approach to the liability of vehicle owners has been conceptually changed. The current version of the Civil Code norms regulating this issue provides for liability “without fault” and does not allow for the law-abiding behavior of drivers to be taken into account. In a number of cases of road accidents, drivers of vehicles who fully followed the rules of the Road Rules traffic and other acts of legislation, who comply with all requirements for the operation of vehicles, do not simply become involuntary participants in an accident, but are recognized as obligated to compensate for the damage caused by their vehicle, i.e. persons who are not guilty of the accident and even those who did not have the opportunity to prevent it,” noted Svetlana Lyubetskaya.

Article 948 of the Civil Code determines that legal entities and citizens whose activities are associated with an increased danger to others (including the use of vehicles) are obliged to compensate for damage caused by a source of increased danger, unless they prove that the damage arose due to force majeure or the intent of the victim.

“Today the Civil Code says that in the event of gross negligence of the victim and the absence of guilt of the harm-doer in cases where his liability occurs regardless of guilt, the amount of compensation should be reduced or compensation for harm may be refused, unless otherwise provided by law. At the same time, in case of harm to the life or HEALTH of a citizen, refusal to compensate for the harm is not allowed. Such liability “without guilt" caused numerous disputes and complaints and was perceived as unfair,” the parliamentarian noted.

This rule on the inadmissibility of refusal to compensate for harm in the event of harm to life or health is excluded. “There will be a general rule on the possibility of reducing the amount of compensation for harm or refusal to compensate for harm in the event of gross negligence of the victim and the absence of guilt of the harm-doer, as well as on the possibility of reducing the amount of compensation for harm caused by a citizen, taking into account his property status,” the deputy added.

“Life situations that prompted such changes arose when, while driving on the road, a driver could hit a pedestrian who was lying on the road. Or when a cyclist was moving in a stateALCOHOL intoxication , who, at the moment when the driver of the vehicle catches up with him, loses control and an accident occurs. This is not the driver's fault. It was not technically possible to prevent such circumstances and the very condition of the victim led to these grave consequences. In these situations, legal disputes often arose and participants in legal relations misunderstood how responsibility should be assigned in the absence of guilt, and therefore approaches in this regard were changed,” the parliamentarian clarified.

***Read the full text on the BELTA website.