Spóźniające whether dropping from the distribution of public transport is a real nightmare for people using public transport every day of. Exposes passengers not only on the stress and inconvenience associated for example. for being late to a meeting, but also the serious consequences. I recently read article describing the incident, when a passenger due to delay in arrival order of the bus lost a large amount and intends to seek compensation from the carrier. Does such an application has a chance of success?
Lost opportunity
The hero of the article was planning to get from the town of Slupsk Redzikowo local bus to the train station, where he had to go by train to Gdansk, which, in turn, wanted to take a plane to London. In London, while waiting for him to work with salaries totaling approximately. 10 k. zł. Unfortunately, the plan collapsed at the very beginning – Local bus did not arrive, the hero is reached or the station, or to the airport to Gdansk, nor to London. Promised lost earnings. Currently unlucky traveler wishes to obtain compensation from the carrier in the amount of lost earnings.
For the delay to be compensated
The liability of the carrier, as a rule does not raise special concerns. Art. 62 paragraph. 2 pr. wire. is clearly, that the carrier is liable for damage, passenger suffered as a result of delayed arrival or cancellation regularly plying the means of transport. It is worth mentioning here, so that passengers benefit from the regulation does not apply so long as only between about. 2,5 years. Previously, the carrier's liability was limited only to cases of willful misconduct or gross negligence. Fortunately, the Constitutional Court considered such provision to be inconsistent with the Constitution and the 11.12.2008 r. He gained more stringent for the current sound carriers.
In our case it was not in dispute, regular bus service that has not arrived on time. I assume both, that the theorem is also true of the passenger, that he had the opportunity to earn in London, the amount 10.000 zł and it is a pity, he suffered through a, that has not arrived to London.
Does this mean, he has lost the right to demand the amount of carrier?
To contribute to the damage
The basic principle of civil law (and the traffic right in spite of many specific regulations belongs to the branch of law) it is, that damage includes both the actual loss and lost profits. From this point of view is difficult to accuse the hero claims the article – earnings, which disappeared, undoubtedly be considered as lost profits.
But we can say, the pay was lost only by the action of the carrier?
In our case, the victim himself, after all is not without fault. Even if he was not able to reach the railway station by public transport, had the opportunity to try to get there by taxi – suffer relatively little additional cost, and would save a lot of losing a larger amount. Even if he could not catch the train, could take a taxi to get to Gdansk – route probably would take less time than traveling by train. Would flow in this case hundreds of gold, but still it would be less than expected earnings.
The Civil Code in art. 362 provides, that damages can be reasonably reduced, if the victim contributed to the creation or increase of the damage. One gets the impression, that just kind of situation we face in the described article. This failure to take the victim's actions to reduce the damage caused, that the final loss of up to EUR 10.000 zł. Thus there are grounds to reduce the possible damages to the degree of, what caused the victim alone, that the damage.
Inadequate causal
However, even when – which clearly questionable – victim had no choice but to reach the airport on time, his claim for damages does not have to be justifiable. Art. 361 by. 1 k.c. provides, that required to pay compensation is liable only for the normal consequences of an act or omission, from which the resulting harm.
Can you tell the, that the normal effect of the bus is late, A passenger in the amount of lost earnings 10.000 zł?
I think it's highly doubtful – analyzing the local carrier operating risks need not assume, delays in service delivery that will result in a cascade of events culminating in the unfortunate loss of a job in another country. In a similar way, should the bus late one did not manage to pick winning lottery million, carrier will not have to pay the equivalent of the prize. Loss of winning the lottery certainly is not a detriment, which in normal circumstances will late bus. Thus, also in the absence of contribution from the victim's carrier rather not have to pay compensation amounting to the entire loss of earnings.
In sum, chances hero article in dispute with judge a bus to the small. However, as the lawyers say – unsearchable are the judgments of district courts 🙂
Indeed, an interesting thing, I myself am curious how it ends.
I will monitor the case, but I'm afraid, that the end will be very interesting, simply because the victim did not go to court.
I wonder how he proves, he was at the bus stop and waited for the bus 🙂
Helping colleagues never missing 🙂
More, I wonder if the local carrier, winnien zwocic victim for the cost of plane tickets (the two sides). However, if the court moved the following “damages can be reasonably reduced, if the victim contributed to the creation or increase of the damage” chooses not to pay compensation, This is probably the decision will also include costs incurred in connection with the purchase of tickets.
It depends – if the cost of a taxi, which the victim would have to take, not to be late for a plane, Ticket prices would reach (and it is not yet possible in the era of low cost airlines), I would see no problem in the award of such amount. Also because if remedial measures are taken by the injured parties of a certain level could suffer.
How do we know,that the victim had taksówkę.Kwota 10 thous.ZL for work abroad is attractive for Polish robotnika.Londyńczyka powaliłąby such salary not to kolana.Nie would have made the job a Polish entrepreneur because it's for him and his no amount would be the taksówkę.W therefore I think,that of contributing to the injury victim could speak only after proving the thesis,that deliberately did not use other opportunities to reach the,that such a possibility had both financial and technical
Unlikely, article that the hero did not have any financial resources, but assuming such a situation actually contribute to the plea could fall. Still would be a problem with the adequacy of causation and the effect would be the same.
Trochę odgrzeję temat.
A co w przypadku gdy nie było opóźnienia w rozpoczęciu usługi, ale nastąpiło opóźnienie w jej zakończeniu, w tym sensie, iż w trakcie przewozu poddano pojazd kontroli.
Czy w takiej sytuacji znajdzie zastosowanie rozporządzenie 181/2011?
Czy przepis art. 62 Prawa przewozowego ustanawia odpowiedzialność absolutną przewoźnika czy opartą na zasadzie winy?
@ adt
Art. 62 wprowadza w mojej ocenie odpowiedzialność na zasadzie winy. Wykreślenie rażącego niedbalstwa nie wyłącza bowiem ogólnych zasad odpowiedzialności kontraktowej, a trudno znaleźć uzasadnienie dla odpowiedzialności absolutnej w tym wypadku.
Thank you for your answer.
Dopytałbym jeszcze o kwestię rozporządzenia 181/2011. Rozporządzenie przez opóźnienie rozumie różnicę między zaplanowanym czasem rozpoczęcia usługi regularnej zgodnie z opublikowanym rozkładem a rzeczywistym czasem jej rozpoczęcia. W mojej ocenie nie reguluje kwestii opóźnienia w zakończeniu usługi, wynikłej np. z faktu poddania przewoźnika kontroli drogowej. Literalna interpretacja prowadzi do wniosku, iż pasażerowi w takim przypadku nie przysługują roszczenia z rozporządzenia (może na zasadach “ogólnych” dochodzić odszkodowania). Także w takim przypadku nie będzie możliwym uruchomienie procedury z 82a i sankcji z 95b ust. Road Transport.
@ adt
I agree. The regulation does not govern the situation of delay in arrival at your destination, So damages in this case is pursued on a general basis, and sanctions from the Road Transport Act does not apply.
Good morning.
I recently met a similar situation. I had planned journey by air from Gdansk, to Trinidad, by Frankfurt, Rio de Janeiro, Paname. Unfortunately, for technical reasons, airplane took off from Gdansk, flight has been delayed. As a consequence,, firm, which arranged the trip informed me, that the next day I'm not going. I lost my contract sailor. I intended to work on a ship in those regions of the Caribbean. Embarking was to take place two days after my going forth, Unfortunately, the ship could not wait and had to quickly return to the sea to life. As a result, I emerged from the rotation change crew and until today I do not work. All this situation happened a month ago. The whole blame known German air carrier. Do I have a chance to apply for compensation, for the loss of work? Unfortunately, but the taxi would not give advice to perform intercontinental travel in two days. There was also no other option, to make it through these two days to fly in time other airlines.
Can you ask for help and advice?
@ sailor
If indeed the carrier shall, in this case the responsibility for the delay – it usually is, but not always – You can try to claim compensation, it demonstrates Mr., that indeed this contract was sure.