of October 10, 2013 No. 1590-O
About refusal in acceptance to consideration of the claim of the citizen Gavrilov Ivan Egorovich to violation of its constitutional rights provisions of articles 1 and 6 of the Federal law "About Obligatory Civil Liability Insurance of Owners of Vehicles"
Constitutional court of the Russian Federation as a part of the Chairman V. D. Zorkin, K. V. Aranovsky's judges, A. I. Boytsova, N. S. Bondar, G. A. Gadzhiyev, Yu. M. Danilov, L. M. Zharkova, G. A. Zhilin, S. M. Kazantsev, M. I. Kleandrov, S. D. Knyazev, A. N. Kokotov, L. O. Krasavchikova, N. V. Melnikov, Yu. D. Rudkin, N. V. Seleznyov, O. S. Hokhryakova, V. G. Yaroslavtsev,
having heard the conclusion of the judge A. I. Boytsova who was carrying out preliminary studying of the claim of the citizen I. E. Gavrilov based on article 41 of the Federal constitutional Law "About the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation"
1. In the claim in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation the citizen I. E. Gavrilov disputes constitutionality of article 1 of the Federal Law of April 25, 2002 No. 40-FZ "About obligatory civil liability insurance of owners of vehicles" in the part opening concept of insured event, and article 6 of the same Federal Law determining object of compulsory insurance and insurance risk.
As appears from the documents attached to the claim, the decision of Kuzminsky district court of the city of Moscow of October 19, 2009 left without change of higher instances by courts satisfies partially claims of the citizen V. to I. E. Gavrilov about indemnification caused to health as a result of the road accident, and compensation of moral harm. In reasons for the decision the court specified the following: the claimant is recognized guilty of the road accident as a result of which harm is done to the claimant that he is confirmed by the resolution on the case of administrative offense; however, as harm to health of the claimant is done as a result of collision of sources of enhanced danger, the owner of one of which was I. E. Gavrilov, the harm done to the claimant shall be compensated by the defendant irrespective of lack of his fault in the road accident.
By the decision of the Lyubertsy city court of the Moscow region of March 23, 2011 left without change of higher instances by courts it is refused satisfaction of claims of I. E. Gavrilov to insurance company with which it consisted in contractual relations, about collection of insurance indemnity and compensation of moral harm. The court came to conclusion that the claimant would have the right to address for insurance payment, it be found guilty of the road accident; from materials of case it is seen that other participant of the road accident who behind indemnification, caused to health, did not address the specified insurance company was guilty person.
According to the applicant, the concept "insured event" used in the Federal Law "About Obligatory Civil Liability Insurance of Owners of Vehicles" does not allow to consider in law-enforcement practice situation when the person who fulfilled the duty on civil responsibility insurance of owners of vehicles, found not guilty of the road accident which resulted from interaction of two vehicles, but nevertheless compensated the harm done to health guilty of its making based on the judgment loses the right to insurance payment in connection with refusal in it insurance company in view of lack of fault of such person in damnification that contradicts regulation of paragraph two of Item 3 of Article 1079 of Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and also violates the applicant's rights guaranteed by Articles 17, of 19, of 45, 46 and 53 Constitutions of the Russian Federation.
2. The Federal Law "About Obligatory Civil Liability Insurance of Owners of Vehicles" in paragraph eleven of Article 1 determines insured event as approach of the civil responsibility of the vehicle owner for the damnification of life, to health or property of the victims when using the vehicle involving obligation of the insurer according to the agreement of compulsory insurance to perform insurance payment; according to its article 6 object of compulsory insurance are the valuable interests connected with risk of the civil responsibility of the vehicle owner according to the obligations arising owing to damnification of life, to health or property of the victims when using the vehicle in the territory of the Russian Federation; approach of the civil responsibility according to the obligations specified in Item 1 of this Article, except as specified emergence of responsibility owing to 2 events listed in its Item belongs to insurance risk on compulsory insurance.
In sense of the given legislative provisions, circumstance with which the law connects emergence of obligation of the insurer to perform insurance payment, the insured event, i.e. approach of the civil responsibility of the vehicle owner for damnification of life, to health or property of the victims is when using the vehicle. At the same time neither these regulations, nor Item 2 of article 9 of the Law of the Russian Federation of November 27, 1992 No. 4015-I "About the organization of insurance case in the Russian Federation", fixing that insured event is the made event provided by the insurance contract or the law with which approach there is obligation of the insurer to make insurance payment to the insurer, insured person, beneficiary or other third parties, connect need of implementation of insurance payment with availability or absence - in case of interaction of sources of enhanced danger - fault of one vehicle owner in damnification to another.
Thus, in the itself challenged provisions of articles 1 and 6 of the Federal law "About Obligatory Civil Liability Insurance of Owners of Vehicles" determining for the purposes of this Federal Law of the concept "insured event", "object of compulsory insurance" and "insurance risk" cannot be considered as depriving of the insurer as the parties in the agreement of obligatory civil liability insurance in case of use of responsibility to it in the form of compensation of the harm of the right done to them to impose on the insurer requirement about implementation of insurance payment in the amount of compensation made to the victim.
Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info
Database include more 50000 documents. You can find needed documents using search system. For effective work you can mix any on documents parameters: country, documents type, date range, teams or tags.
More about search system
If you cannot find the required document, or you do not know where to begin, go to Help section.
In this section, we’ve tried to describe in detail the features and capabilities of the system, as well as the most effective techniques for working with the database.
You also may open the section Frequently asked questions. This section provides answers to questions set by users.