There are various types of traffic accidents that occur on a daily basis: One such case is when a trailer disconnects from the tow truck and collides with a third vehicle. The key issue in this case concerns both the existence and the extent of the liability of the insurance company with which the tractor unit is insured, and specifically whether this liability also includes damage caused by the trailer. In principle, the law explicitly includes trailers in the category of motor vehicles to which Law 489/76 "On Compulsory Insurance for Motor Vehicle Civil Liability in the Event of Accidents," stipulating that "Any trailer vehicle coupled to the main motor vehicle or not, as well as a bicycle equipped with an auxiliary engine, is also considered a motor vehicle." In fact, according to case law, a trailer is considered a motor vehicle even if it has been disconnected from the main towing vehicle. In a related case that arose, a trailer detached from the tractor unit and entered the opposite lane, where it collided with a passing vehicle, which veered off course and crashed into an adjacent construction site. The collision caused material damage to the vehicle and injured its driver. From the above facts, it can easily be concluded that the driver of the tow truck was at fault for not adequately checking his vehicle to ensure that the trailer was securely attached, a fault that was also accepted by the Court. The crucial question, however, concerned the insurance company's liability for compensation, given that the insured vehicle was the tractor and not the trailer, which caused the damage. According to the defendant insurance company, there was no question of liability, precisely because the cover it provided extended only to the towing vehicle. However, this argument was rejected by the Court on the grounds that, even if there was a relevant clause in the insurance contract that excluded the specific case from insurance coverage, the plaintiff's claim in this case stemmed directly from the law and could not be excluded even by a contrary agreement.

Community legislation has established a strict set of rules of law, with the aim of fully protecting the rights of passengers in the event of a railway accident. The need for full harmonization of the legislation of all Member States led the European institutions, and specifically the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, to adopt a Regulation, i.e. a binding legislative act with mandatory, horizontal, and direct application to all Member States of the Union.

A landmark decision was made by the Single-Member Misdemeanor Court of Amaliada, sentencing a former Head of the Technical Works Department to six months imprisonment following a lawsuit filed against him by a driver who was seriously injured in a traffic accident in 2017 on the Patras–Pyrgos highway, near Kapelto. The accident occurred near Kapelto when, for unknown reasons, the driver’s car veered off the road, likely due to the slippery road surface caused by recent rain, and crashed into a power pole, causing the vehicle to overturn. According to the Court's decision, the Head of the Technical Works Department was sentenced to six months imprisonment because “being obligated by his position to exercise particular care and attention, he acted negligently, that is, he lacked the necessary attention required under the circumstances and failed to perform the required actions, thereby failing to prevent bodily harm to others. Although he had a specific legal duty to prevent this outcome, particularly at the above location on the National Road, despite the existence of a rainwater drainage system, the responsible department did not carry out the proper cleaning. As a result, water accumulated at the roadside, and combined with heavy rainfall, it had no outlet, causing water to pool on the road surface, effectively creating a ‘lake.’ Consequently, this led to the traffic accident.” The Department Head noted that he had informed the elected officials of the Region about the road condition and requested immediate tendering of maintenance work. He also emphasized that maintenance on the National Road Network is exclusively done through contracts awarded by the Region to accredited contractors via competitive bidding, as his department lacks personnel, machinery, and technical expertise. However, at the time, no maintenance contracts were active. This is essentially the first conviction of its kind, which may pave the way for other citizens to follow a similar legal route.

he keeping of pets cannot be prohibited by apartment building regulations, provided that the conditions of Article 8 of Law 4039/2021 on the keeping of pets in residences are met. According to Law 4039/2012 "on domestic and stray pets and the protection of animals from exploitation or use for profit" and in particular Article 1, a pet is defined as: "any non-wild animal that is kept or intended to be kept by humans, mainly in their home, for reasons of animal welfare or companionship, and is under the direct supervision and care of its owner, keeper, companion, or guardian."

A sale subject to a resolutive condition is a sale whose results may be reversed by the occurrence of a future and uncertain event. According to the provisions of Article 202 of the Civil Code "if the legal act is contingent upon the reversal of its results by a future and uncertain event (resolutory condition), as soon as this event occurs, the legal act ceases to have effect and the previous situation is automatically restored."

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.

Based on the legal framework of EU Directive 2000/26/EC, a person who has been injured in an accident abroad may claim compensation for material damage or bodily injury based on the legislation of the country where the accident occurred, when they return to their place of permanent residence, in their own language and through procedures with which they are familiar. The International Insurance Office (9 Xenofontos Street, 10557 Athens, tel. 210 3236562 – email compbody@mib-hellas.gr) and the Auxiliary Fund N.P.I.D. (5 Ypatia Street, 10557 Athens – tel. 210 3327490 – email: i.c@epikef.gr) has been designated as the information center. Furthermore, in accordance with the EU Directive, each insurance company was required to appoint a Claims Representative in each EU country to settle their claims. All Claims Representatives of the companies are registered with the respective Information Centers, which interested parties can contact in order to find out who the claims representative is for the insurance company that insured the vehicle that caused them damage. However, for the provisions of the 4th Directive and Presidential Decree 10/2003 to apply, liability must be indisputable and no lawsuit must have been filed against the insurance company of the vehicle at fault. The injured party must submit a claim for compensation at their place of residence, to the insurance company of the vehicle that caused the accident or to the Claims Representative, who will be informed by the Information Center. The claims representatives of foreign insurance companies in Greece under the 4th Directive are listed on the website of the Greek Information Center. If, within three months, the injured party does not receive a reasoned reply or there is no Claims Representative, then he/she submits an application to the Compensation Body of the country where he/she resides and, after a period of two months, that body shall settle the claim in accordance with the law of the country of the accident and pay compensation, if required to do so. Furthermore, the injured party does not have the right to sue the Compensation Body in court under the provisions of the 4th Directive or Presidential Decree 10/2003. Finally, it is worth mentioning that the Compensation Body is also responsible for compensating injured parties who reside in an EU country and have suffered damage in another Member State: from a vehicle whose identity cannot be identified,in cases where the identity of the insurance company of the vehicle that caused the accident cannot be established,in cases of uninsured vehicles from third countries whose National Bureau of Motor Insurers has joined the Green Card system.

A floor or apartment is the part of a building or floor, together with its components and the cubic space within it, which is technically enclosed by walls or other building elements so as to be clearly separated from the other (divisible or indivisible) parts of the building and thus constitutes an independent part of it, suitable for separate and independent residential use in general. Only floors and floor apartments, as well as basements and rooms under the roof that are equated with floors by law, may be subject to horizontal ownership. Therefore, it is not possible to establish divided ownership of open space, unless provided for in the (registered) constitutive act or on the basis of (registered) subsequent agreement of all parties that this space is to be rebuilt by granting an independent right of ownership over the future floor or floors, in which case the establishment of divided ownership refers to the future floors or floor apartments and is subject to Article 201 of the Civil Code, under the suspensive condition of their construction. Until the right to build on the existing roof of the building is exercised, it remains a common area which provides the right of joint use to all floor owners and in no case does the right of elevation grant the beneficiary the power of exclusive use of the uncovered roof prior to the covering of the uncovered area for the realization of the future floor. With the implementation of the right to build upwards (addition of a floor), the new floor becomes the exclusive property, possession, and ownership of the beneficiary of the extension, along with the corresponding percentage of compulsory co-ownership of the land and other common and shared parts of the building. The right to extend the building upwards (height) by adding new floors belongs jointly to all co-owners of the land. The space intended for reconstruction is not characterized as an object of ownership but as an exploitable asset for the exercise of the right of extension (height), which is provided as a consequence of the powers arising from the right of ownership or co-ownership. It may be agreed in the deed of establishment of floor ownership that the right of height belongs to one or more of the co-owners of the land, but even in this case, the right of height appears as a consequence of the existing right of co-ownership, otherwise it is a power inherent in the right of co-ownership of the beneficiary on the land. Thus, this specific right is not understood as a right of ownership but as a power of all or some of the co-owners, as agreed by the parties, deriving from their right of ownership or co-ownership of the land on which the existing building stands. This right (of extension), which is transferable to a third party who is not a floor owner, is autonomous and independent of the existing horizontal properties.

According to the provisions of Article 932 of the Civil Code, "in the event of a tort, regardless of compensation for property damage, the court may award reasonable monetary compensation, at its discretion, for moral damages. This applies in particular to those who have suffered damage to their health, honor, or chastity, or who have been deprived of their liberty...". It follows from the above provision that in the event of an attack on a person's health, the person entitled to claim monetary compensation is the person who has directly suffered the moral damage against whom the tort is directed (AP 648/2002 EllDk 2002.1616). Such a person is the holder of the legal right that was infringed (e.g. the owner of the damaged car, the person injured as a result of a car accident) or another person who is the holder of a contractual right that is protected against tort under Article 914 of the Civil Code (e.g., a tenant, a user) (see Kritikos, Compensation for Motor Vehicle Accidents, 1998 edition, p. 330, no. 945, EfDod 212/2004 Dim. NOMOS). Exceptionally, in the event of death, the beneficiaries are the persons belonging to the victim's family. Third parties are not entitled by law to monetary compensation, even if they suffer emotional distress due to a close family relationship or other close connection. However, rigid application of this principle can lead to cruelty. For this reason, in cases of serious physical injury to the face resulting in the loss of important bodily functions, as a result of which the person is considered to be in a "vegetative state" to such an extent that they are close to death, third parties (relatives) are also recognised as having a claim for financial compensation for moral damage. Such well-known cases include the serious injury of a child, as a result of which he or she falls into a state of unconsciousness, and the case of the inability of the person (spouse) to have sexual intercourse or procreate. In such cases, a claim for monetary compensation for moral damage is recognized for the child's parents and the spouse of the injured person (but also for the person who has become incapacitated). Here, the case is different when the serious injury of the minor child occurs in front of his mother, who suffers a nervous breakdown and is forced to be hospitalized in a neurological clinic. This is considered to be physical injury to the mother herself, i.e., a wrongful act committed against her. Consequently, she also suffers moral damage and is entitled, in principle, to monetary compensation (see relevant Ath, Kritikos, Compensation from motor vehicle accidents, 1998 edition, p. 332). In general, however, according to prevailing case law and theory, third parties are not entitled by law to monetary compensation, even if they were involved in the accident but did not suffer physical injury, unless the circumstances of the accident were such that they suffered physical injury, even in the form of psychological shock, in which case they are considered to be victims of the tort and are entitled to monetary compensation for moral damage (see Ath. Kritikos, op. cit., p. 330 ff. and decision no. 5665/2009 of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Piraeus, A' PUBLICATION LAW, CASE 2010/48). In such cases, these are referred to as "Shockschaden" (shock damage), in which it is possible to recognize a right to monetary compensation for moral damage and any other violation of the personality of a third party that affects the feelings of affection of another, if the act is unlawful also vis-à-vis third parties and if the causal link also covers these emotional effects. In such cases of serious offenses against a third party, according to the most correct view, it is considered that Article 932(3) of the Civil Code should be applied by analogy (see Styl. Paterakis, "Financial Compensation for Moral Damage," 2nd edition, 2011, p. 92).

It is well known that due to the crisis, many properties are now being offered at very low prices. However, the purchase of any property (residential, commercial, land, agricultural) involves risks that buyers are often unaware of, resulting in unfavorable purchases or the acquisition of "problematic" properties with legal defects. Proper legal advice on the purchase of real estate is crucial in order to protect the prospective buyer. The legal check includes research in the land registry and cadastre of the location of the property, in order to verify the legality and correct registration of the title or titles of ownership of the property (contracts), any third-party claims or encumbrances (e.g., when purchasing a plot of land or farmland, part of it may have to be ceded as a right of way to a neighboring property, etc.). It is particularly important to carefully research the property to be purchased in advance, in order to examine: A) Whether the property is unauthorized, whether the building permit corresponds to its actual area, or whether there are any exceedances in its declared area. B) Whether the property has a mortgage or mortgage lien. C) Whether the property is claimed by a third party or bank. D) Whether the property has been correctly declared in the land registry where required. E) Whether the title deeds (contracts) of the property correspond to its actual status. Furthermore, in cases where the property is to be purchased with a loan, the presence of a lawyer throughout the sale is considered necessary in order to examine both the buyer's financing terms and compliance with the correct procedure during the notarial transfer. However, apart from purchasing a property with a loan, it is also common to purchase a property that has a mortgage or a mortgage pre-notation. In such cases, in order for the buyer to acquire the property free of encumbrances, a written agreement must be drawn up to secure the transaction. In addition, it must be thoroughly verified that the debt to be repaid or offset against the purchase price corresponds to the debt encumbering the property with a pre-notation or mortgage.