From the provisions of Articles 297, 298, 300, 330(b) and 914 of the Civil Code, it follows that tortious liability for compensation presupposes unlawful and culpable conduct, the occurrence of damage, and a causal link between the perpetrator’s conduct and the damage.
Unlawful conduct is conduct that contravenes a prohibitive or mandatory rule of law which confers a right or protects a specific interest of the injured party, and such conduct may consist of a positive action or an omission to perform a certain action.
Negligence is also a form of fault, which exists when the care required in transactions is not exercised, i.e. the diligence that, if exercised, measured by the conduct of a reasonably prudent and diligent person in the sphere of activity of the person who caused the damage, would have made it possible to prevent the unlawful and damaging result.
A causal link exists when the unlawful and culpable conduct of the perpetrator was, according to the teachings of common experience, capable, in the normal and ordinary course of events, of causing the damage and did cause it in the specific case.
The above also applies in the case of Article 10 of Law GPN/1911 regarding the fault of drivers of colliding vehicles, according to which the provision of Article 914 of the Civil Code is applicable.
Furthermore, violation of the provisions of the Highway Code does not in itself constitute fault in the occurrence of a car accident, but it is an element to be weighed by the court of first instance in relation to the existence of a causal link between the specific act and the result that occurred.
