In disputes arising from traffic accidents, a frequently requested and financially significant claim is the claim for compensation for improved nutrition. This claim falls within the conceptual content of medical expenses, i.e., the expenses that were or will be necessary in the future for the salvation and restoration of the victim’s health, regardless of whether the latter actually incurred them. is included in the petition of most related lawsuits, but in order for it to be adjudicated, detailed information and data must be presented to substantiate it, and certain conditions must be met.
In particular, in the case of a claim for compensation in the event of a car accident, consisting of an expense, according to Articles 111(2), 118, and 216(1)(a) and (b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the following must be stated and specified:
- a) what food the victim was eating before the accident, so that their need for improved nutrition can be assessed,
- b) what the improved diet after the accident consists of and what units of weight (or other type of unit) are consumed and at what price per unit, as well as what its caloric value is.
In light of the above, it is clarified that improved nutrition is not provided for every physical injury, but only when it is medically necessary in the specific case and, as a rule, is excluded when the improved diet is included in the daily diet of an average person.
In full accordance with the above, the courts do not even proceed to examine the substantive merits of the case, but reject as vague the claim for the award of expenses for improved nutrition when the plaintiff does not specify in the introductory document what food he was receiving in the period prior to the accident, so that his need for improved nutrition can be assessed, how many units of weight (or other type of unit) he receives and at what price per unit.
The claim for compensation to the plaintiff for improved nutrition expenses is rejected as unfounded, in the event that he does not prove that any improvement in his diet was made on the recommendation of his attending physician, by presenting any relevant medical certificate or recommendation to that effect.
In closing, it should be noted that, on the one hand, improved nutrition is not provided in every case of physical injury, but only when it is medically necessary, and on the other hand, that in any case, according to common experience, the eating habits of the average modern citizen cover the nutritional needs of even a weakened organism, as long as they include dairy products, meat, fish, and fruit, with the result that the usual diet covers the improved diet in the sense given by the plaintiff in each case (EfLam 22/2010, Epidikia 2011/47, Ath. Kritikos, Compensation for motor vehicle accidents, ed. 1998, para. 221), thus making it extremely difficult to award the claim in question.
