The Tarragona Provincial Court decides to increase to 79,396.97 euros the amount that the insurer AXA Seguros Generales must pay to a 78-year-old man after one year Traffic accidentas can be seen from the judgment of October 30th. Initially, the injured party had received a payment of 50,500 euros less, i.e. 28,896.97, an amount with which the man was not satisfied due to the damage suffered and which, in his opinion, was not taken into account in the partial compensation.
The injured party’s lawsuit demanded a significantly higher compensation amount of 71,396.97 euros plus the corresponding statutory interest. Although the total amount requested was not reached, the Catalan judiciary now recognizes that the original amount was low injuries sustained. Of the 79,396.97 euros that now belong to the 78-year-old, 8,000 euros have already been paid in advance, so the outstanding amount is 71,396.97 euros plus the corresponding statutory interest.
The Catalan justice system is resolving a dispute that began in 2021 after a traffic accident and its court is examining it Judgment made in the first instance by the Court of First Instance and Instruction No. 3 of Tortosa, which had recognized partial compensation for the damage caused to the victim.
The 78-year-old man decided to appeal the court’s decision on the grounds that the assessment of the evidence was flawed and that the verdict omitted relevant evidence such as the testimony of his doctor and witnesses who described one significant deterioration in their autonomy after the accident. The man requested that the moral damage due to loss of quality of life be recognized to a very serious extent, which would have increased the compensation to 115,000 euros (less the 2,500 euros already recognized for the mild degree), or alternatively the classification as severe or moderate, the amounts corresponding to the respective degree.
The axis of the conflict has all along revolved around determining the extent of the impact on the plaintiff’s quality of life following the accident. The chamber analyzed this in detail medical and social reportsas well as the expertise of both parties. It was discovered that the actor was already addicted before the accident and had been officially recognized since 2016, which meant he needed help with several basic activities of daily living. Following the accident, he was diagnosed with Grade II dependency, meaning a more frequent, although not permanent, need for help.
The court evaluated the testimony of the witnesses and the expert reports, but concluded that the most compelling evidence was the medical and social documentary evidence, which showed that many of the restrictions The accident claimed by the actor existed before the accident. In this sense, the court cited the report of the defendant’s expert, who claimed that “this patient comes out of a very serious situation and remains very serious with nuances, which he tried to portray in his report.” However, the court recognized that the accident resulted in an “aggravation of some of the functional limitations already suffered by the actor and which impaired his personal autonomy in carrying out the basic activities of daily living.”
With regard to the assessment basis, the court used the legal standard for medium damage and set the compensation at 79,396.97 euros, of which 8,000 euros had already been paid by the insurer. This amount represents a partial recognition of the plaintiff’s claim, but is far higher than the amount awarded at first instance. However, the court rejected the request expected interests in Article 20 of the Insurance Contract Law, as this point was not contestable. Furthermore, the order did not impose any costs on either party as the appeal was only partially allowed. If the legal and jurisprudential requirements are met, the judgment can be appealed to the higher court by means of a cassation appeal.
About The Author
