The Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal for Family, Civil and Administrative Claims upheld a ruling rejecting a young man’s claim, who demanded 51,000 dirhams in compensation for what he suffered as a result of a quarrel with another.
In detail, a young man filed a lawsuit against a hospital, a medical institution and an insurance company, demanding that they be bound by solidarity and solidarity for 51 thousand dirhams in compensation, indicating that he was involved in a traffic accident by the driver of the vehicle insured by the insurance company, which resulted in his injury in separate places of his body, after which he was transferred to the hospital. The driver of the vehicle was convicted of his offense and personal error, and a criminal judgment was issued against him with a final fine. However, while he was in the hospital, the treatment given to him caused side effects, which resulted in serious complications in his left eye.
The court of first instance dismissed the lawsuit by the third defendant, because the accident was outside the scope of insurance coverage, considering that he was injured as a result of the altercation between him and the driver of the aforementioned vehicle when they left a nightclub, and as a result, the young man grabbed the vehicle, and the driver moved it quickly until he fell from it, What caused his bodily injuries, and the driver was convicted, with what that court can only judge by rejecting the case against the insured company, and he is on his own to sue the driver of the vehicle if that is required, and secondly by rejecting his case in its case before all his opponents, taking into account what has been proven from the one who previously submitted his complaint with The Medical Liability Committee before the hospital, and after issuing its decision that there was no error, he appealed against that decision, and his grievance has not been decided yet, and he is also on his own to file a lawsuit after deciding on his grievance, and the plaintiff was not satisfied with the ruling, so he appealed it.
In the merits of the ruling, the court stated that the appellant took the initiative to sue the first and second respondents, directly before the first degree, without submitting what his grievance had reached in terms of the previous decision of the Liability Committee that there was no medical error against him, so he did not fulfill that procedural condition to accept his claim, so the judiciary had the right not to accept it by rejecting it in its case As well as its rejection by the third appellant, as it did not establish evidence of its liability for compensating him as a result of the incident based on his bodily injury, or present what contradicts what I concluded of the decline in insurance coverage for his accident, and did not explain or indicate the aspects of his appeals regarding that part of the appealed judgment, As the current appeal became unsupported and worthy of rejection, and ruled to uphold the appealed ruling.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news