Road fatality damages cut by over Lm100,000

A judgment by the Court of Appeal reduced the damages payable by a driver to the heirs of his passenger by over Lm100,000.

The court however confirmed that part of the judgment dealing with the driver's responsibility for the accident.

The judgment was delivered yesterday by the Court of Appeal composed of Chief Justice Vincent De Gaetano, Mr Justice Joseph D. Camilleri and Mr Justice Joseph A. Filletti in the case filed by Mario and Domenica Mizzi and their children against Paul Genovese and Darren Micallef.

The Mizzis said they were the heirs of Marion Mizzi who had been a passenger on a motor bike driven by Mr Genovese at Tal-Barrani Road, Zejtun in January 1997.

Mr Genovese's bike had collided with a car driven by Mr Micallef and Ms Mizzi had died as a result.

The Mizzis asked the court to declare the drivers responsible for the accident and to award them damages.

In its judgment delivered in March 2002, the first court had ruled in favour of the Mizzis, ordering Mr Genovese to pay Lm134,905.60 to them.

Mr Micallef was declared not to be responsible for the accident nor for the damages.

Mr Genovese appealed and the Court of Appeal concluded yesterday that the first court had decided correctly and justly the question of responsibility for the accident.

On impact, the Mini Minor driven by Mr Micallef had been literally split in half when it was hit by the motorbike. It resulted that Mr Genovese had driven the motor bike at excessive speed and in a dangerous manner and had rendered himself incapable of driving properly.

There was therefore no doubt that Mr Genovese was responsible for the accident.

Mr Genovese had also appealed from the award of damages, arguing that the amount of Lm134,905.60 was excessive.

The Court of Appeal noted that the first court had based its calculation of the damages sustained upon a judgment delivered in 1998 in the names Anthony Turner et vs Frances Agius et. However that judgment had been radically altered upon appeal in 2003, and the Court of Appeal yesterday declared that it was in full agreement with the appeal judgment.

In the case Turner vs Agius, the Court of Appeal had ruled that the multiplier that had to be applied was that of 30 years, and that there had to be a reduction both upon the basis of the degree of dependency between the victim and her heirs, and another reduction for self consumption.

When applying these principles to the present case, the Court of Appeal cut the damages awarded by the first court from Lm134,905.60 to Lm31,618.50.