Severity Of The Fault And Detachable Fault From The Legal News Service
LexInter | December 22, 2003 | 0 Comments

Severity Of The Fault And Detachable Fault From The Legal News Service


On the sole means, taken in its third branch:

Considering the law of August 16-24, 1790;

Whereas Mr X … was the victim, in 1991, of a skiing accident while he was taking an embankment formed by the grooming of the chairlift departure area, in the resort of Flaine, located on the territory of the municipality of Araches-lès-Carroz; that he had the SEPAD (Study, Participation and Development Company), concessionaire for the operation of ski lifts and the maintenance of the slopes, as well as the Paris CPAM, for the purposes of see the first person responsible for its damage due to the failure to indicate the significant difference in level of the slope; that SEPAD called in guarantee its insurer, the company Lloyd continental,

Whereas, to declare the judicial jurisdiction incompetent for the benefit of the administrative jurisdiction to hear the requests of Mr X …, the judgment under appeal states that even supposing that the development of the track was at fault, this hypothetical fault would have intervened within the framework of the execution of the mission of the SEPAD, that consequently, any idea of ​​detachable fault of the service had to be rejected in this case;

That by so ruling, while the circumstance that the fault alleged against SEPAD would have occurred within the framework of the execution of the mission of this body, did not exclude that it could be detachable from the service, the court of appeal, which did not investigate whether this fault did not present a seriousness such as this character can be recognized to him, did not give a legal basis to its decision;

FOR THESE REASONS, without there being any need to rule on the other branches of the plea:

BREAK AND CANCELED, in all its provisions, the judgment rendered on September 19, 2000, between the parties, by the Chambéry Court of Appeal; returns, consequently, the cause and the parts in the state where they were before the aforementioned judgment and, to be done right, returns them before the court of appeal of Grenoble;

Condemns the Study, Participation and Development Company and the Swiss company to pay the costs;

Considering article 700 of the new Code of Civil Procedure, rejects the request of the Swiss company accidents;

Said that on the diligence of the Attorney General near the Court of Cassation, this judgment will be transmitted to be transcribed on the sidelines or following the broken judgment;

Thus done and judged by the Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber, and pronounced by the President in his public hearing on November 13, two thousand and three.


Avatar of LexInter


Lexinter Law, with a team of dedicated authors who strive to provide you with all the relevant and actionable tips on the legal aspect of your life. Our goal is to educate you so that you can make legal action with ease, or find the right person who can help you with your unique personal legal dilemma. Take care!