تعويض ضرر الموت الناتج عن حوادث الطرق
Date
2025-05-21
Authors
هيثم محمد عياد فضل عجلوني
Haitham M F Ajlouni
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Al-Quds University
Abstract
يتناول هذا البحث مسألة قانونية دقيقة ذات بعد اجتماعي واقتصادي، تتعلق بالتعويض عن ضرر الوفاة الناتجة عن حوادث الطرق، خاصة في ظل النظام القانوني الفلسطيني القائم على قانون التأمين رقم 20 لسنة 2005، وقد انطلقت الدراسة من واقعة متكررة في الحياة العملية، وهي أن المصاب في حادث طرق قد يفارق الحياة نتيجة الحادث، مما يولد ضررًا لاحقًا لا على المتوفى فحسب، بل على ورثته أيضًا، وخاصة أولئك الذين كانوا يعتمدون عليه في الإعالة، أو من لحق بهم ضرر مادي أو معنوي بسبب وفاته.
يميز البحث بين نوعين من الأضرار: الأول هو الضرر الذي أصاب المصاب ذاته قبل وفاته (مثل الألم والمعاناة، وفقدان الدخل خلال مدة الإصابة)، والثاني هو الضرر اللاحق بالورثة بسبب الوفاة (كفقدان المعيل والدخل المستقبلي، والضرر المعنوي والضرر المرتد). وقد سلّطت الدراسة الضوء على مدى إمكانية المطالبة بهذه الأضرار، ومدى قابلية بعضها للانتقال ضمن التركة، في مقابل ما يمكن المطالبة به على سبيل التعويض الشخصي للورثة.
يتوسع البحث في تناول الإشكالية الجوهرية المتمثلة في أن المتوفى –غالبًا– ليس طرفًا مباشرًا في عقد التأمين، مما يطرح تحديًا قانونيًا حول العلاقة بين الورثة وشركة التأمين، ومدى أحقية الورثة غير المعالين منه، أو أقربائه، في إقامة دعوى مباشرة على شركة التأمين، دون الرجوع إلى المؤمن له. كما يبرز التساؤل حول مدى انطباق مبدأ نسبية أثر العقد على العلاقة بين شركة التأمين والورثة، مع وجود نصوص قانونية تسمح بمطالبة الغير بالتعويض مباشرة من المؤمن.
ويتوقف البحث عند إشكاليات إثبات الدخل في حالة الوفاة، وخاصة في الحالات التي لا يكون فيها للمتوفى دخل ثابت أو موثق، مثل العمال اليوميين أو أصحاب المهن الحرة، حيث يفتح القانون الباب للإثبات بكافة الطرق، مما قد يؤدي إلى تفاوت كبير في الأحكام القضائية وعدم استقرار في تقدير قيمة التعويض. كما تبرز إشكالية متكررة أمام المحاكم تتمثل في الدفع بسقوط الحق في التعويض أو بالدفع بعدم العلاقة التعاقدية، وهي دفوع قد تكون صحيحة في سياق علاقة تعاقدية، لكنها تُطرح في غير محلها عند الحديث عن المسؤولية التقصيرية المؤدية للوفاة.
في جانب آخر، يبحث البحث في مدى أهلية الورثة في المطالبة بالتعويض عن الضرر المعنوي الذي لحق بالمتوفى، وهل يمكن أن ينتقل هذا الحق إلى الورثة، أم أنه حق شخصي ينقضي بوفاة صاحبه؟ كما يتناول حالة الوفاة غير الفورية، أي عندما يتعرض المصاب لإصابة قاتلة لكنه يبقى حيًّا لفترة قبل أن يتوفى، ويتساءل عما إذا كانت الأضرار الواقعة في تلك الفترة تعتبر جزءًا من التركة، أو تستوجب دعوى مستقلة من الورثة، وما مدى قابلية التعويض عنها.
الكلمات المفتاحية:
(ضرر الموت، حادث الطرق، التعويض، الإعالة، المركبة)
This study addresses a delicate legal issue with a social and economic dimension related to compensation for death resulting from road accidents, particularly under the Palestinian legal system based on Insurance Law No. 20 of 2005. The study is based on a recurring reality in real life: a person injured in a road accident may die as a result of the accident, resulting in subsequent harm not only to the deceased but also to their heirs, particularly those who relied on their support, or those who suffered material or moral harm as a result of their death. The study distinguishes between two types of damages: the first is the damage suffered by the injured person himself before his death (such as pain and suffering, and loss of income during the period of the injury), and the second is the damage suffered by the heirs due to death (such as loss of breadwinner and future income, moral harm, and repercussions). The study sheds light on the extent to which these damages can be claimed, and the extent to which some of them can be transferred within the estate, as opposed to what can be claimed as personal compensation for the heirs. The research expands on the fundamental problem that the deceased is—often—not a direct party to the insurance contract. This poses a legal challenge regarding the relationship between the heirs and the insurance company, and the extent to which non-dependent heirs, or relatives, have the right to file a direct lawsuit against the insurance company without referring to the insured. The question also arises as to the applicability of the principle of relativity of the contract's effect to the relationship between the insurance company and the heirs, given the existence of legal provisions that permit third parties to claim compensation directly from the insurer. The research addresses the problems of proving income in the event of death, particularly in cases where the deceased has no fixed or documented income, such as day laborers or self-employed individuals. The law opens the door to proof by all means, which can lead to significant variations in judicial rulings and instability in assessing the value of compensation. A recurring issue before the courts is the plea of forfeiture of the right to compensation or the plea of the absence of a contractual relationship. These pleas may be valid in the context of a contractual relationship, but are raised inappropriately when discussing tortious liability leading to death. On another note, the study examines the eligibility of heirs to claim compensation for moral damages suffered by the deceased. Can this right be transferred to the heirs, or is it a personal right that expires with the death of its owner? It also addresses non-immediate death, i.e., when the injured person sustains a fatal injury but remains alive for a period before dying. The study questions whether damages sustained during that period are considered part of the estate, or whether they warrant a separate claim from the heirs, and the extent to which they are eligible for compensation. Keywords: (Death damage, road accident, compensation, maintenance, vehicle)
This study addresses a delicate legal issue with a social and economic dimension related to compensation for death resulting from road accidents, particularly under the Palestinian legal system based on Insurance Law No. 20 of 2005. The study is based on a recurring reality in real life: a person injured in a road accident may die as a result of the accident, resulting in subsequent harm not only to the deceased but also to their heirs, particularly those who relied on their support, or those who suffered material or moral harm as a result of their death. The study distinguishes between two types of damages: the first is the damage suffered by the injured person himself before his death (such as pain and suffering, and loss of income during the period of the injury), and the second is the damage suffered by the heirs due to death (such as loss of breadwinner and future income, moral harm, and repercussions). The study sheds light on the extent to which these damages can be claimed, and the extent to which some of them can be transferred within the estate, as opposed to what can be claimed as personal compensation for the heirs. The research expands on the fundamental problem that the deceased is—often—not a direct party to the insurance contract. This poses a legal challenge regarding the relationship between the heirs and the insurance company, and the extent to which non-dependent heirs, or relatives, have the right to file a direct lawsuit against the insurance company without referring to the insured. The question also arises as to the applicability of the principle of relativity of the contract's effect to the relationship between the insurance company and the heirs, given the existence of legal provisions that permit third parties to claim compensation directly from the insurer. The research addresses the problems of proving income in the event of death, particularly in cases where the deceased has no fixed or documented income, such as day laborers or self-employed individuals. The law opens the door to proof by all means, which can lead to significant variations in judicial rulings and instability in assessing the value of compensation. A recurring issue before the courts is the plea of forfeiture of the right to compensation or the plea of the absence of a contractual relationship. These pleas may be valid in the context of a contractual relationship, but are raised inappropriately when discussing tortious liability leading to death. On another note, the study examines the eligibility of heirs to claim compensation for moral damages suffered by the deceased. Can this right be transferred to the heirs, or is it a personal right that expires with the death of its owner? It also addresses non-immediate death, i.e., when the injured person sustains a fatal injury but remains alive for a period before dying. The study questions whether damages sustained during that period are considered part of the estate, or whether they warrant a separate claim from the heirs, and the extent to which they are eligible for compensation. Keywords: (Death damage, road accident, compensation, maintenance, vehicle)
Description
Keywords
Citation
عجلوني، هيثم محمد عياد. (2025). تعويض ضرر الموت الناتج عن حوادث الطرق [رسالة ماجستير غير منشورة]. جامعة القدس.