Prim Awla tal-Qorti Civili; 2018-12-05; Joseph Farrugia vs. Allianz S.p.A; 697/2018
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:MT:CIVP:2018:114494
Date: 2018-12-05
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Malta

82018MT1205(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a dispute relating to insurance resolved by the Prim'Awla tal-Qorti Civili (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’).
A natural person domiciled in Malta (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) was involved in an accident during his vacation in Italy. He was riding a motorcycle with his friends and was hit by an Italian driver in a car. The plaintiff brought a case before the Court of First Instance against the insurance company of the car driver (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) and sought the court to declare a) that it was the car driver who caused the accident and b) that the defendant is liable to pay compensation for damages instead of the car driver.
The Court of First Instance carefully assessed the evidence of the case consisting of testimony of the plaintiff and of his friends who testified as witnesses, the records of Italian police including photographs of the accident, the medical records from the Italian hospital and further testimony from the Maltese doctor where the plaintiff underwent surgery on his leg. The defendant made no appearance at the hearing.
The Court of First Instance further thoroughly assessed the amount of the damages to be paid, based on the injuries suffered, the value of the damaged motorcycle, the medical expenses, expenses caused by the translation of the claim into Italian language and loss of income - not only loss already suffered, but multiplied by the future potential loss of income due to the plaintiff’s permanent disability. As the Court recalled, the Maltese legal system leaves the quantification of damages always at the judge’s discretion. Finally, the total amount to be paid by the defendant was calculated to EUR 20_442.29.
The Court of First Instance cited Article 11(1)(b) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1), according to which ‘an insurer domiciled in a Member State may be sued in another Member State, in the case of actions brought by the policyholder, the insured or a beneficiary, in the courts for the place where the claimant is domiciled’ and Article 13(2) of the same Regulation, according to which ‘Articles 10, 11 and 12 shall apply to actions brought by the injured party directly against the insurer, where such direct actions are permitted’. The jurisdiction of the Maltese court was therefore established and sufficiently justified.
Based on all the evidence the Court of First Instance declared that the accident was solely caused by the Italian car driver and that the defendant as the insurer of the car driven by the car driver is liable to pay the compensation to the plaintiff in the amount as set out by this judgment.
(1) Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.