Recovery of moral damage caused by pets
Pets are controlled by humans as long as this control is carried out. For example, a dog walking dozens of meters away from its owner or simply without him is deprived of control, therefore, it can be considered as a source of increased danger. Harm caused by a dog that has been left without proper control for various reasons should be considered as harm caused by a source of increased danger.
By the decision of the Kostanay District Court of Kostanay region dated April 9, 2015, compensation in the amount of 15,000 tenge was collected from K-va NG in favor of X-oh A.M. The court found that when the plaintiff returned from work, two dogs ran out of the courtyard of the house, and one of them bit her on her left leg, after which the defendant came out of the courtyard and drove the dogs into the yard, and told her that the dogs got loose and someone forgot to close the gate. The defendant was brought to administrative responsibility and found guilty of improper maintenance and dog walking. The plaintiff suffered harm to his health, accompanied by physical pain, fright, and discomfort.
Moral harm can only be caused by a violation of personal non-property benefits and rights, and in order to compensate for it, according to Article 951 of the Civil Code, the victim must prove a violation of non-property benefits and rights.
Moral damage caused by actions (inaction) violating the property rights of a citizen is not subject to compensation.
By the decision of the Almaty District Court of Astana, which was left unchanged by the appellate judicial board, the claim of I.A.F. against JSC "Subsidiary of JSC "BTA Bank" JSC "BTA Mortgage" for compensation for moral damage was denied.
The plaintiff motivated his claims by the fact that the illegal actions of the Bank to recover the amount under the bank loan agreement, in the presence of a previously concluded agreement between the plaintiff and the Bank on the transfer of ownership of real estate to repay the debt under the bank loan agreement, caused moral damage to him and his family.
In rejecting the claim, the court applied the provisions of paragraph 4 of Article 951 of the Civil Code, which stipulates that moral damage caused by actions (inaction) violating a citizen's property rights is not subject to compensation, except in cases provided for by legislative acts.
By the decision of the Atyrau City Court, which was left unchanged by the court of appeal, the claims of IP Zh-in K.U. to P.M.D. for recovery of material damage and compensation for moral damage were partially satisfied, part of the compensation for moral damage was denied.
According to the circumstances of the case, it was established that the decision of the Atyrau City Court of February 2, 2015 on the claim of Um-oh T.S. to IP "Zh-inu B.K." for compensation of material damage and moral damage was partially satisfied. It was decided: to recover from IP "Zh-in B.K." in favor of U-voy T.S. the amount of material damage in the amount of 473,200 tenge, compensation for moral damage in the amount of 50,000 tenge.
It was established from court records that on December 14, 2014, Ms. T.S. came to the Pizza House cafe with I. A., where they deposited their outerwear in the wardrobe, and Ms. M., who worked as a cafe cloakroom attendant, accepted a mink fur coat from Ms. T.S..Levinson", giving her a token. It was established that the Levinson brand mink coat, purchased 14 days before its theft for 2,600 US dollars, was issued by an employee of IP "Zh-in K.U." to another person.
According to the judicial acts that took place, writ of execution was issued, and in the order of execution of the judicial act of the 1st T.S., funds in the amount of 626,243 tenge were received from IP Zh-in K.U. as compensation, for which she provided a receipt.
The first M.D. was severely reprimanded in connection with the issue of clothes without a corresponding number to the visitor, which led to the loss of someone else's property. According to paragraph 1 of Article 933 of the Civil Code, a person who has compensated for damage caused by another person (an employee in the performance of his labor (official, official) duties, a person driving a vehicle, etc.) has the right to claim (recourse) against this person in the amount of the compensation paid, unless another amount is established by legislative acts.
Under the established circumstances, the court concluded that the plaintiff's claims were justified in terms of the claims for the refund of the compensation paid in the amount of 626,243 tenge per month, by virtue of a full liability agreement, since the decision established that the mink coat was issued by an employee of IP "Zh-in K.U." to another person and the amount of compensation is KZT 626,243. In this regard, the claim is subject to satisfaction in this part.
When considering the plaintiff's claims for the recovery of the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court proceeded from the norm of art. 951 of the Civil Code, given that the actions of Ms. M.D. did not violate the personal non-property benefits and rights of IP J.K.U., while the payment of compensation to Ms. T.S. relates to property relations.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
