In a distressing incident, an Asian driver collided with an Arab cyclist on the Al Dhaid Masafi Road, then fled the scene, leaving the victim with a permanent disability of 5%.
When apprehended, the driver attributed his actions to fatigue-induced drowsiness and negligence. Subsequently, the injured party initiated a civil lawsuit before the Dubai Courts, seeking restitution from the driver, his employer, and the insurance company covering the vehicle.
The plaintiff described how a driver struck him from behind while he was cycling, detailing the resulting physical and psychological damages. He reported the incident to authorities, leading to the driver's arrest and admission of fault. The driver was charged with reckless driving, failure to stop after the accident, and neglecting to aid the victim or seek assistance. The Traffic Court convicted him, solidifying the culpability established in the criminal proceedings.
Turning to the civil judiciary for redress, the plaintiff argued that the driver's employer bore responsibility for his actions, given that the vehicle involved belonged to the company. Additionally, the insurance company covering the vehicle was implicated in the compensation claim. Despite legal arguments presented by the defendants, the court deemed the driver's actions as established by the criminal verdict and found the employer liable for the employee's conduct, ordering compensation of 100,000 dirhams.
The court addressed the insurance company's assertion that the plaintiff had not followed proper procedures for resolving insurance disputes. While acknowledging legal requirements, the court emphasized the irrefutable evidence of the driver's guilt and the employer's vicarious liability, leading to the ruling for compensation.
Expert medical analysis confirmed the lasting impact of the accident on the victim, particularly a 5% permanent disability affecting movement and causing persistent pain. This assessment further supported the plaintiff's claim for compensation.
In its deliberation, the court upheld the principle of employer liability for the actions of its employees and rejected attempts to absolve responsibility based on procedural grounds. The ruling underscored the imperative of accountability in cases of negligence resulting in harm. Despite the legal intricacies, the court prioritized the victim's right to restitution for the damages inflicted, emphasizing the significance of upholding justice and providing recourse for those affected by reckless behavior on the road.
