Rear-End Collisions Not Exclusively Driver's Fault in Court's View - The First Instance Court ruled that the Commission neglected its duties as outlined in Article 85 (1) of the Treaty.
In a recent rulings by the Higher Regional Court in Frankfurt am Main, the court has clarified that not all rear-end collisions inevitably place blame on the driver who collides from behind. The case in question saw the leading vehicle, amidst heavy traffic, abruptly abort a lane change before suddenly returning to its original lane, necessitating an abrupt stop. This sudden braking resulted in the following vehicle crashing into the rear of the leading vehicle.
The initial court verdict, handed down by the Regional Court of Giessen, assigned 80% liability to the defendant. However, the defendant, subsequently appealing to the Higher Regional Court (OLG), successfully managed to reduce their liability to 50%, resulting in equal blame allocation between the two parties.
The OLG determined that the general presumption of fault in rear-end collisions, often referred to as the "Anscheinsbeweis," did not apply in this scenario. The court concluded that the leading driver had failed to signal or check traffic while re-entering the lane. However, the driver of the rear-ending vehicle was also found to be at fault as they should have been prepared for sudden braking or lane changes by the vehicle ahead, given the traffic conditions.
It is important to note that German traffic law emphasizes the shared responsibility of both parties in collisions, especially when one party's actions are deemed negligent. In this particular case, the court considered factors like negligence, fault allocation, and legal precedents to reach its decision. The decision is not yet final.
The Higher Regional Court's ruling underlines the importance of both drivers maintaining vigilance and adherence to traffic regulations in order to minimize the risk of accidents, particularly when changing lanes.
- In light of the Higher Regional Court's decision, the Court of First Instance might reconsider cases involving rear-end collisions, given their interpretation of Article 85 (1) of the Treaty, especially when assessing negligence and fault allocation.
- As general-news platforms report on road incidents, they may find it relevant to discuss the recent ruling by the Higher Regional Court in Frankfurt am Main, highlighting the exceptions to the "Anscheinsbeweis" in rear-end collisions.
- In addition to sports coverage and sports-betting news, online news outlets might now include updates on the ongoing court cases related to car-accidents, justice, and crime-and-justice, given the recent decision of the Higher Regional Court in Frankfurt am Main.
%20of%20the%20Treaty.){kind=link}