Absolute liability in road accidents: compensation without proving fault
The Road Accident Victims Compensation Law provides that liability is absolute and full, and that it makes no difference whether there was fault on the part of the driver. This is the major exception to the ordinary tort rule, and it moves the centre of gravity of a case from fault to the extent of the bodily injury.
The rule: absolute liability, without the question of fault
In ordinary tort law an injured person must generally prove that the other party was negligent or breached a duty. For road accidents the legislature chose a different route.
Section 2 of the Road Accident Victims Compensation Law, 5735-1975, provides in subsection (c) that liability is absolute and full, and it makes no difference whether or not there was fault on the part of the driver.
The result is that the injured party is not required to prove negligence. It is enough that bodily injury was caused in a road accident in which the vehicle was involved. As a rule, a driver whose own conduct caused the accident is also within the group of those entitled - and that is what separates this track from every other area of tort law.
Source: Road Accident Victims Compensation Law, 5735-1975, section 2(c).
Who is liable to compensate
Section 2(a) provides that the person using a motor vehicle, referred to in the law as the driver, is liable to compensate the injured party for bodily injury caused in a road accident in which the vehicle was involved.
Section 2(b) widens the circle of liability: where the use of the vehicle was made with the permission of its owner or of the person in possession of it, liability also applies to the person who gave that permission.
In practice, the claim in most cases is brought against the compulsory insurer of the vehicle involved, rather than against the driver personally.
Source: Road Accident Victims Compensation Law, section 2(a)-(b).
What this track covers, and what it does not
The language of section 2(a) speaks of bodily injury. That is the boundary of the track: absolute liability applies to physical injury and its consequences, not to damage to property.
Damage to the vehicle itself, or to other property, is not claimed on this track. It is dealt with under property insurance or in an ordinary tort claim, where liability does have to be proved.
A single accident may therefore generate two parallel tracks - one for bodily injury and one for property damage - each examined according to its own rules.
When entitlement is denied
Absolute liability is not unlimited. Section 7 of the law lists situations in which an injured party is not entitled to compensation, among them:
- A person who caused the accident intentionally.
- A person who drove the vehicle in breach of the law concerning use of a vehicle without permission.
- A person who drove without a licence to drive that vehicle, other than a licence that lapsed solely for non-payment of a fee.
- A person for whom the vehicle served, or assisted, in the commission of a felony.
- A person who drove the vehicle where the vehicle had no valid compulsory insurance, or where the policy did not cover the use made of the vehicle.
- The owner of the vehicle, or the person in possession of it, who permitted another to drive it without valid compulsory insurance.
The ground of denial for absence of insurance is the most significant in practice, because it highlights a point easily missed: the absolute liability in section 2 does not depend on insurance, but the entitlement of the driver personally does. A driver who drove without valid compulsory insurance may find themselves outside the track, while a passenger or pedestrian injured in the same accident is directed to the fund.
An important point: the law preserves the right of the dependants of an injured person even in these situations, subject to the conditions of the section.
The list of grounds is updated by legislative amendment, so in any concrete case the current text and the particular circumstances must be checked.
Source: Road Accident Victims Compensation Law, section 7.
When there is no insurer to sue
Alongside the ordinary track, the law established a dedicated fund. Under section 12 its role is to compensate an injured party who is entitled to compensation under the law but has no insurer from whom compensation can be claimed.
The main situations in which the fund comes into the picture:
- Where the responsible driver is unknown - for example in a hit and run.
- Where there is no insurance cover.
- Where the insurer is in liquidation.
The absence of insurance therefore does not necessarily close the door on the injured party. It changes the identity of the party from whom compensation is claimed, and requires the conditions of entitlement on that track to be examined.
Source: Road Accident Victims Compensation Law, section 12.
What this changes in practice
Once fault leaves the agenda, the centre of gravity of the case moves elsewhere. The questions that remain are not who was at fault, but:
- Whether the event is a road accident as the law defines it - a question that is not always self-evident.
- The extent of the bodily injury - medical and functional disability, the effect on earning capacity, and future needs.
- Which party is to be sued - the insurer of which vehicle, or the fund.
For that reason, most of the professional work in these cases is concentrated on establishing the medical and functional basis of the injury and on selecting the correct track, rather than on proving fault.
In summary
Section 2(c) of the Road Accident Victims Compensation Law establishes liability that is absolute and full, independent of fault. Section 2(a)-(b) defines who is liable - the driver, and at times also the person who permitted the use. The track applies to bodily injury only. Section 7 lists situations in which entitlement is denied, and section 12 directs the injured party to the fund where there is no insurer to sue.
Because there is no need to prove fault, the outcome of a case usually turns on the extent of the injury and on the identity of the party to be sued. Both questions require accurate medical foundation and familiarity with the different tracks.
If you were injured in a road accident, contact us and we will review the facts, the appropriate track and the first step together.
The questions that come up most
I was injured in an accident I caused myself. Am I entitled to compensation?
Does the track also cover damage to the vehicle?
What happens when the vehicle at fault leaves the scene?
Are there situations in which entitlement is denied?
All pages in this practice
Defamation · Road accidents · Medical negligence
Defamation Claims: The GuideDefamationRoad Accident Compensation LawMaking a Road Accident ClaimFatal Road AccidentsCompensation from KarnitLiability and Burden of ProofMedical Malpractice ClaimsThe Medical OpinionInformed ConsentPrinciples of liability · Work accidents
Joint TortfeasorsAbsolute LiabilityCompensation for a Work AccidentWork disability claimOccupational diseaseMicrotrauma injuryCommuting the disability pensionWere you injured in a road accident?
Tell us what happened, your medical position and which documents you hold. We will examine the appropriate track and the first step.