Court of Cassation Ruling on SNCF Liability

Extract

[...] Under Article 1384 of the Civil Code, the Court of Cassation noted that "the victim's behavior did not present the characteristics of force majeure alone capable of totally exonerating the SNCF from its liability incurred under the aforementioned text". If the Court of Cassation shows severity in rejecting the characterization of force majeure against railway transporters it nevertheless suggests a mitigation of this severity as soon as there exists a possibility of partial exoneration of the railway transporter (II). The rejection of the characterization of force majeure as an exonerating cause of responsibility The solution rendered by the Court of Cassation in this case is classic in that it renews the principle of severity against railway transporters It is also an opportunity to clarify the constituent elements of force majeure A classic severity At first glance, the solution rendered in this case by the Court of Cassation is quite classic: it thus inscribes itself in the line of characterization of a causal link. [...]

[...] The Court of Appeal then dismisses by a ruling dated 18 March 2005, the traveler's request, noting that the traveler's action constitutes a case of force majeure that exonerates the SNCF from all liability. On the one hand, the irresistibility of the traveler's action can be noted: in fact, Mr. François forced the automatic locking system of the door using a rescue opening device that was actually sealed in order to open the train door that was traveling at a speed of 8 km/h. [...]

[...] This recognition is confirmed but however, its scope is limited The recognition of a partial exemption of liability confirmed The Court of Cassation rules that "the victim's behavior did not present the characteristics of force majeure alone capable of totally exonerating SNCF from its incurred liability", suggesting that partial exoneration for the victim's fault is thus possible. The fact of a third party or the fault of the victim if they themselves present the characteristics of force majeure leads to a total exemption of liability. [...]

[...] Among the exonerating causes of liability, there is force majeure, which designates an event presenting, at the time of the damaging fact, an unpredictable and irresistible character. The jurisprudence had already long agreed to recognize force majeure in cases where unpredictability and irresistibility were combined. The question that divided doctrine and jurisprudence at the time was whether unpredictability should systematically be required to characterize force majeure or whether irresistibility was sufficient. If the second civil chamber of the Court of Cassation opted for the cumulation, the first chamber (Cass. [...]

[...] In this sense, civil jurisprudence has been able to judge that it is not unpredictable for the SNCF the victim's behavior consisting of getting off the moving train in that the functioning system of the doors makes this action of the victim possible, although being quite dangerous. Or that the presence of a pedestrian on the level crossing that adjoins a station was not unpredictable, despite the closure of the half-barriers (Cass. civ January 2003). In this regard, the doctrine, and notably Mr. [...]