Post by account_disabled on Jan 31, 2024 11:18:27 GMT
A drunk driver does not exempt the insurer from paying compensation if the accident occurred due to factors other than the condition of the car driver. This was the unanimous understanding of the 32nd Chamber of Private Law of the Court of Justice of São Paulo when maintaining the insurance company's obligation to compensate a client's loss. The driver, represented by lawyer Carlos Domingos Crepaldi Junior , crashed into the entrance of a city in São Paulo because of works being carried out in the area, but the company refused to pay compensation after learning that he was driving drunk.
In the first instance, the insurer was obliged to Buy Phone Number List pay R$27.6 thousand (which was equivalent to 105% of the insurance value), plus R$10 thousand per passenger. The decision led to an appeal by the insurance company, which requested a change in the sentence, alleging that the insured intentionally aggravated the risks by driving the car while drunk. In his statement, the highway police officer who responded to the accident call highlighted the influence of construction work at the location, including the excess of rocks and sand on the road, as a major factor in the crash.
For the case's rapporteur, judge Caio Marcelo Mendes de Oliveira, the driver is not responsible if the relationship between the driver's alcohol level and the accident has not been proven. "The culpable responsibility of the driver of the insured vehicle for the event and the restrictive clause on which the insurance company was based to deny coverage for the event was not demonstrated," he said. Oliveira cited as a precedent the appeal 0038866-81.2012.8.26.0576, judged by the 30th Chamber of Private Law of the TJ-SP and reported by judge Penna Machado in 2015. In this case, the collegiate understood that the "absence of evidence that was the determining cause for the occurrence of the accident" guarantees the payment of compensation.
In the first instance, the insurer was obliged to Buy Phone Number List pay R$27.6 thousand (which was equivalent to 105% of the insurance value), plus R$10 thousand per passenger. The decision led to an appeal by the insurance company, which requested a change in the sentence, alleging that the insured intentionally aggravated the risks by driving the car while drunk. In his statement, the highway police officer who responded to the accident call highlighted the influence of construction work at the location, including the excess of rocks and sand on the road, as a major factor in the crash.
For the case's rapporteur, judge Caio Marcelo Mendes de Oliveira, the driver is not responsible if the relationship between the driver's alcohol level and the accident has not been proven. "The culpable responsibility of the driver of the insured vehicle for the event and the restrictive clause on which the insurance company was based to deny coverage for the event was not demonstrated," he said. Oliveira cited as a precedent the appeal 0038866-81.2012.8.26.0576, judged by the 30th Chamber of Private Law of the TJ-SP and reported by judge Penna Machado in 2015. In this case, the collegiate understood that the "absence of evidence that was the determining cause for the occurrence of the accident" guarantees the payment of compensation.