The Court of Cassation rigorously evaluates the circumstances of accidents to determine inexcusable fault, considering factors like awareness of danger and fault severity.
Extract
[...] Court of Cassation, Civil Chamber 28 March 2019, nos. 18-14.125 and 18-15.855 - What are the characteristics of inexcusable fault within the meaning of Article 3 of Law No. 85-677 of 5 July 1985? In the field of civil liability, the qualification of inexcusable fault remains a delicate and complex issue. Through the Civ March 2019, no. 18-14.125, here commented, the Court of Cassation addresses this thorny question, inviting us to reflect on the criteria required to establish such a fault and the rigor necessary in its assessment. [...]
[...] 07-14.705 judgment, the Court of Cassation also emphasized the importance of contextualizing the behavior of minors in assessing inexcusable fault. It rejected the classification of inexcusable fault for minors involved in a bicycle accident, considering that their young age and lack of awareness of danger did not allow for the characterization of such a fault. Thus, the March judgment is in line with a jurisprudential tradition that is demanding in terms of the classification of inexcusable fault, emphasizing the need for a rigorous and contextualized assessment of the circumstances of each case. [...]
[...] In addition to this aspect, inexcusable fault is closely linked to the author's awareness of the danger that the author of the fault may have, and the voluntary nature of this fault. B. The assessment of the lack of awareness of the danger and the voluntary nature of the fault in the qualification of inexcusable fault In the qualification of inexcusable fault, the awareness of the danger and the voluntary nature of the fault play a crucial role. Case law requires that the author of the fault had awareness of the danger to which they were exposing themselves and that they deliberately chose to act despite this knowledge. [...]
[...] According to the doctrine, the notion of inexcusable fault is closely linked to that of subjective responsibility. In fact, for a fault to be qualified as inexcusable, the author must have acted with deliberate intent and a keen awareness of the risk incurred. In the similar case Civ May 2007, No. 06-13.053, the Court of Cassation confirmed this approach by rejecting the qualification of inexcusable fault for minors who had also cycled without lighting. The Court considered that their behavior, although dangerous, did not present the exceptional gravity required to be qualified as inexcusable. [...]
[...] However, unlike the Court of Appeal, the Court of Cassation holds that these elements are not sufficient to characterize an inexcusable fault. In fact, it concludes that the minors did not act deliberately with a full and complete awareness of the danger incurred. This analysis highlights the importance for the Court of Cassation to carefully evaluate the degree of awareness of the danger in the author of the fault in order to determine if it can be qualified as inexcusable. [...]
