The Insurer Refused Compensation Under the European Accident Report Due to the At-Fault Driver's Medical Treatment: What the Court Decided
The traffic accident occurred on 26 June 2024 in the city of Starokostiantyniv. The driver of a Skoda Octavia, while turning left, failed to yield to a Mercedes-Benz C180 travelling in the same direction, resulting in a collision. This information was reported by the Khmelnytskyi Court of Appeal.
At the scene, both drivers completed a traffic accident report (European accident statement), in which the Skoda Octavia driver admitted fault. After completing the report, he sought medical attention at a hospital and was diagnosed with a forearm abrasion sustained in the accident.
According to an expert’s assessment, the material damage caused to the owner of the Mercedes-Benz C180 amounted to UAH 121,906. However, the insurance company did not recognise the accident as an insured event and refused to pay compensation. This decision was based on the fact that the participants had concealed the injury of the driver who sought medical help after the accident during the completion of the European accident report.
Following the insurance company’s refusal, the owner of the damaged vehicle filed a lawsuit seeking to recover UAH 121,906 in material damages caused by the accident, along with court costs, from the at-fault driver.
The Starokostiantyniv District Court of Khmelnytskyi region upheld the claim.
The defendant appealed the decision, arguing that the plaintiff had not proven his fault in causing the accident and that the court of first instance had incorrectly assessed the evidence, including witness testimony and the European accident report.
The Court of Appeal noted that the Skoda Octavia driver’s fault in the accident was confirmed by the case materials, including the European accident report, explanations, and the accident diagram. Therefore, the absence of administrative liability did not exempt him from civil liability for the damage caused.
The Court of Appeal concurred with the first instance court’s conclusion that, due to the concealment of the driver’s injury during the completion of the European accident report, the insurance company’s refusal to pay compensation was lawful. Consequently, the at-fault driver was liable to compensate for the damages caused.
Accordingly, the Court of Appeal found the grounds of the appeal to be unfounded and upheld the first instance court’s decision.
The full text of the Court of Appeal’s ruling in case No. 683/1067/25 will be available in the Unified State Register of Court Decisions.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua, follow SUD.UA on Google News , and join us on VIBER, WhatsApp, Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the important events.
Popular news
