Victim's Fault and Guardian's Liability under Article 1242
Download
Read an extract
Themes
Guardian liability, victim fault, damage causation, thing under one's care, Article 1242 Civil Code, Court of Cassation, contributory fault, exclusive cause, force majeure, third party fault, quasi-objective liability, responsibility of things, Civil Code, French law, tort liability
Reader
Abstract
Extract
of 5
Abstract
Court of Cassation ruling on the liability of a guardian of a thing under Article 1242, paragraph 1 of the Civil Code, and the conditions under which the victim's fault can exonerate the guardian.
Extract
[...] Court of Cassation, Civil Chamber April No. 20-19.746 - What is the scope of application of the principle of exemption of the guardian when the victim has committed a fault? Civil Law of Obligations: Contractual and Extracontractual Liability Session The Fact of Things Commentary on Judgment: Cass. 2e civ April 2022, n° 20-19.746 What anyone suffers loss from their own fault, is not understood to be suffering loss this adage which comes to us from Pomponius Roman jurist of the middle of the second century) meanswhoever suffers a loss through their own fault is not supposed to suffer a loss ». [...]
[...] On is indeed responsible for the things that one has under one's care under Article 1242, paragraph 1 of the Civil Code, which provides that 'One is responsible not only for the damage one causes by one's own act, but also for that caused by the act of the persons one must answer for, or the things one has under one's care. ». It completes Article 1240 of the Civil Code, which deals with extracontractual liability. Two conceptions of guardianship are possible. A purely legal conception, which follows from the exercise of real rights over the thing: the factual owner of the thing is its guardian. The other possible conception is the material conception. [...]
[...] In recognizing the victim's fault, the guardian can then exonerate (in part of the fault). The partial exoneration of the guardian in the face of the victim's fault is recognized with the Cass, 2nd civil March 1995 (n°93-14.059) decision. The judges had deduced that the victim had «committed a fault by neglecting to ensure her own safety » and that, as a consequence, «the guardians partially exonerate themselves from the presumption of liability weighing on them ». Here, the victim's fault of imprudence is clearly characterized and this therefore has the consequence of exonerating the apartment owner. [...]
[...] The Court of Cassation therefore places its decision on the foundation of the guarantee, in order to ensure that the victim of bodily harm is indemnified. In fact, the main objective of the Court of Cassation in retaining the partial responsibility of the owner is to better protect the victims and grant them better compensation. The indemnifying function of civil liability is indeed its most important role. With this judgment, the Court therefore reinforces the principle that the guardian of the thing can only be exempt with a fault of the victim that is the exclusive origin of the damage. [...]
[...] This fault has also directly contributed to the production of the prejudice. In fact, if the victim had not sat on the edge or had not consumed the psychotropic substances, she would probably not have fallen. Here, the Court makes an assessment in abstracto of the victim's fault. The judge will build an abstract model, a type of behavior considered normal. The behavior that would have been adopted by a reasonable person (she is moderately intelligent, moderately cautious . ) will be compared to the victim's behavior. [...]
