The Supreme Court sets doctrine and condemns an insurance company
November 30 , // Legal Reforms and Debate
Published in La Tribuna de Ciudad Real
The High Court agrees with the Court of Ciudad Real and condemns the company to pay the civil liability in the cause of the run over by a man to his brother-in-law in the La Granja neighborhood.
The Supreme Court establishes doctrine after condemning an insurance company to assume the payment of civil responsibility in an attempted homicide crime committed in Ciudad Real, in the La Granja neighborhood, when a man intentionally ran over his brother-in-law on the afternoon of 8 December 2015 after a discussion. The event had a great impact in the area and in the rest of the city.
Almost two and a half years later, on May 8, 2018, the defendant, a 42-year-old man with the initials M. J.M., sat on the defendants' bench at the Ciudad Real Court. He admitted to the Second Section Court that he intentionally ran over his brother-in-law J. A. C., then 38 years old, and accepted a five-year prison sentence for attempted murder. The defendant's vehicle insurance company was not willing to pay the civil liability and held a conference to clarify the matter.
The trial court ruled that it had to face compensation, that is, it extended this civil liability directly and jointly to the insurance company, which appealed. The lawyer Jesús García-Minguillán managed to turn the tables, that is, that the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha revoked the sentence of the Court of Ciudad Real to pay compensation as direct civil liable.
The lawyer Dionisio Guijarro, who filed the private accusation on behalf of the victim, appealed in cassation and now the Supreme Court has agreed with him and has sentenced the insurance company to pay the civil liability as a result of a fraudulent act, a attempted homicide. The Supreme Court judges that the insurance company must assume the compensation for the victim and owners of other affected vehicles. And it fixes doctrine by understanding that driving with the vehicle invading a sidewalk and a part of a field for public use is a fact of circulation. Two disparate positions have been discussed. The Court of Ciudad Real considered that the insurance company had to assume civil responsibility and the Supreme Court agreed otherwise, understanding that the intentional abuse occurred on a road adjacent to a main road and, therefore, it should not attend to said civil liability. In addition, it argued that the car was not used in the usual transport functions, but as a weapon, outside of the places destined for the circulation of vehicles, in an open field where the victim was. According to the Supreme Court, the attempted murder using the car as a weapon off the public highway is not a risk insured by the company. Thus, there have been two discrepancies. In the first place, the determination of the injuries and consequences suffered by the victim as a result of the run over and, in the second, the possible coverage of the events by the vehicle insurer. The Ciudad Real Court declared the direct responsibility of the insurance company, which had a mandatory and additionally supplementary underwriting policy up to a target limit of 50,000,000 euros.
The Supreme Court has upheld the appeal filed by the lawyer Dionisio Guijarro, has annulled the ruling of the Supreme Court and has ratified the ruling of the Court of Ciudad Real. He condemned the insurer as directly responsible for the events that occurred around five in the afternoon on December 8, 2015 when the defendant began to shout in Mexico Street, which led to him being rebuked by a man, who was given a punch in the face. After the incident, the defendant drove away in his vehicle, from where he told him that he was going to kill him. After about ten minutes, he returned driving his vehicle at high speed along the Camino Viejo de Alarcos and when he reached Mexico Street, with the intention of ending the life of his brother-in-law who was in a field, next to the sidewalk, he accelerated until get on the curb and run him over.
The Supreme Court establishes doctrine after condemning an insurance company to assume the payment of civil responsibility in an attempted homicide crime committed in Ciudad Real, in the La Granja neighborhood, when a man intentionally ran over his brother-in-law on the afternoon of 8 December 2015 after a discussion. The event had a great impact in the area and in the rest of the city.
Almost two and a half years later, on May 8, 2018, the defendant, a 42-year-old man with the initials M. J.M., sat on the defendants' bench at the Ciudad Real Court. He admitted to the Second Section Court that he intentionally ran over his brother-in-law J. A. C., then 38 years old, and accepted a five-year prison sentence for attempted murder. The defendant's vehicle insurance company was not willing to pay the civil liability and held a conference to clarify the matter.
The trial court ruled that it had to face compensation, that is, it extended this civil liability directly and jointly to the insurance company, which appealed. The lawyer Jesús García-Minguillán managed to turn the tables, that is, that the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha revoked the sentence of the Court of Ciudad Real to pay compensation as direct civil liable.
The lawyer Dionisio Guijarro, who filed the private accusation on behalf of the victim, appealed in cassation and now the Supreme Court has agreed with him and has sentenced the insurance company to pay the civil liability as a result of a fraudulent act, a attempted homicide. The Supreme Court judges that the insurance company must assume the compensation for the victim and owners of other affected vehicles. And it fixes doctrine by understanding that driving with the vehicle invading a sidewalk and a part of a field for public use is a fact of circulation. Two disparate positions have been discussed. The Court of Ciudad Real considered that the insurance company had to assume civil responsibility and the Supreme Court agreed otherwise, understanding that the intentional abuse occurred on a road adjacent to a main road and, therefore, it should not attend to said civil liability. In addition, it argued that the car was not used in the usual transport functions, but as a weapon, outside of the places destined for the circulation of vehicles, in an open field where the victim was. According to the Supreme Court, the attempted murder using the car as a weapon off the public highway is not a risk insured by the company. Thus, there have been two discrepancies. In the first place, the determination of the injuries and consequences suffered by the victim as a result of the run over and, in the second, the possible coverage of the events by the vehicle insurer. The Ciudad Real Court declared the direct responsibility of the insurance company, which had a mandatory and additionally supplementary underwriting policy up to a target limit of 50,000,000 euros.
The Supreme Court has upheld the appeal filed by the lawyer Dionisio Guijarro, has annulled the ruling of the Supreme Court and has ratified the ruling of the Court of Ciudad Real. He condemned the insurer as directly responsible for the events that occurred around five in the afternoon on December 8, 2015 when the defendant began to shout in Mexico Street, which led to him being rebuked by a man, who was given a punch in the face. After the incident, the defendant drove away in his vehicle, from where he told him that he was going to kill him. After about ten minutes, he returned driving his vehicle at high speed along the Camino Viejo de Alarcos and when he reached Mexico Street, with the intention of ending the life of his brother-in-law who was in a field, next to the sidewalk, he accelerated until get on the curb and run him over.
