He had a marine accident while riding a jet ski

The "appeal" supports one million dirhams in compensation for a young man suffering from impotence

The Court of Appeal in Abu Dhabi upheld a ruling of the Court of First Instance, requiring a boat captain and an insurance company to pay one million dirhams in solidarity to a young man as compensation for the captain of the insured boat with the insurance company shocking him while driving a water bike, which resulted in impotence, amputations in his left leg and fractures Sporadic in the body, and the court ruled rejecting the insurance company's appeal that it was not responsible for compensating the plaintiff. It also rejected the plaintiff’s appeal and his request to increase the amount of compensation to 10 million dirhams.

In the details, a young man had an accident while driving a water bike caused by a boat captain on the shore of Abu Dhabi, leaving him with a disability, and the plaintiff was convicted before a court of first instance, which ruled in his presence to convict him, imprison him for two months and fine him 5000 dirhams.

The young man filed a lawsuit and demanded that a forensic doctor be appointed to sign a medical examination on him and determine the injuries he suffered and their degree, the extent of their impact on his work and his future, the percentage of these injuries, their identification, and the determination of the size of the physical pain as a result of the accident, which he still suffers.

The coroner's report stated that the young man suffered traumatic injuries in the pelvis and the left lower extremity, a dislocated fracture of the pubic bone, and multiple fractures, which resulted in an amputation in the left lower end from the level below the knee joint, and a fractured fracture in the left thigh bone, which constitutes a permanent disability estimated at a rate of Deficit 100% of the benefit of the left lower extremity.

He pointed out that there is chronic lower back pain and difficulty when sitting for a long time, which constitutes a permanent disability that is estimated to be 50% functional disability, in addition to that the plaintiff suffers from «impotence», as a result of the loss of erectile ability, which constitutes a permanent disability of 100%, and the court ruled By obliging the defendant and the litigant jointly entered into pay the plaintiff one million dirhams, and obliging them to pay the case's fees and fees and attorney fees.

This court was not accepted by the insurance company, so it lodged an appeal against it and demanded the annulment of the appealed judgment.

And she confirmed that the ruling made a mistake in his decision to oblige her and the captain of the boat to the amount spent, in contravention of what was mentioned in the document specifying her liability in a way that does not exceed 200 thousand dirhams.

For his part, the plaintiff filed a cross-appeal against the ruling, demanded that the judgment be amended, and the judgment obliged the appellant against the insurance company, the owner of the boat, and the captain of the boat, in solidarity and solidarity, to pay him 10 million dirhams, and obeyed the ruling on the error in the application of the law, its interpretation, the failure to cause, and corruption In inference, and the violation of the fixed papers.

The court stated - in the merits of its ruling - that the criminal judgment has its authority in the civil judiciary, while it has decided a necessary chapter regarding the occurrence of the criminal act and the legal description of it and its attribution to the perpetrator, and the civil court must abide by that and adhere to it in its judiciary, indicating the right of return of the injured from the accident to The insurance company is directly obligated to pay compensation, and that the company is obligated to cover the civil liability of the insured or the captain of the boat who caused the accident for the fault of either of them in its use whenever this results in harm to others and this damage is a natural result of the harmful act, and that what is meant by others is not a party to the insurance policy.

The court affirmed in the cross-appeal that the appealed judgment took into account the injuries sustained by the plaintiff, whose condition was stabilized on the percentage of disability, injuries and pain that he had suffered, and that it cost him now and in the future of medical expenses, indicating that the judgment took into account that, and estimated him one million dirhams in total compensation for all these The damages, and the appellant was obligated in the first appeal, and the third appellant was bound jointly, thus taking into account the right to what he deserves blood money or damages, and the second appeal is the other duty to reject, and the court decided to accept the two appeals in form, and in the matter to reject them and support the appealed judgment, and bind each appellant Of his appeal fees.

Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news