[ad_1]
Konstantinos Angelidis was acquitted for the car accident on Vouliagmeni avenue that he had on Christmas 2017. The court with this decision obliges the bus driver, OSY, and the insurance company to pay monetary compensation as compensation for moral damage.
The well-known presenter’s lawyer, Agamemnon TatsiHe spoke to Alpha about the decision, but also about Konstantinos’ health. It turned out that in the end the bus attempted an illegal maneuver from the right lane to the completely left lane and since it was also the so-called harmonica bus, the entire stream on Vouliagmeni avenue was closed, with the result that Konstantinos, who made the maneuver, failed could “Avoid collision,” said the lawyer characteristically.
He added: “The state disability control center has confirmed permanent damage. He gave Constantine more than 90% disability for the rest of his life.” No lawsuit, no compensation can restore the magnitude of damage to this man and how much this family has been hurt. “
The chronicle of the acquittal of Angelidis by the court
The Single First Instance Court of Athens acquitted Konstantinos Angelidis for the car accident he had on Christmas Eve 2017 and generated the health problems he faces today. The court, with ruling 1334/2020, obliges the bus driver, the OSY and the bus insurance company to pay compensation, such as monetary satisfaction for moral damage.
However, the same decision ordered to resume the discussion on the claims he had for the income he has lost and will lose in the future due to his condition, as well as the expense of an exclusive nurse. The purpose was to deliver a certificate from the insurance company for the benefits received or to be received from him, as well as for the amounts covered or to be covered by the insurance company in connection with the accident. In fact, this court has already taken place and a decision on the additional amount to be awarded is awaited.
The decision is of significant jurisprudence, since the popular presenter was behind the bus with which he collided, a position that is usually “charged” and the responsibility for the accident. “It is amazing how modern traffic images can track the events of a complex car accident. In this case, the GPS data showed that, on the one hand, the bus did not follow the predetermined route, but on the other hand, the position of The vehicles were accurately determined during the critical period before and after the collision. Based on this decision and on existing jurisprudence, it appears that the liability of the driver of the vehicle moving behind the vehicle with which the collision occurs is not evident. “Since it must be proven that the vehicle in front complied with traffic regulations and did not attempt an illegal maneuver, which is ultimately the crucial element leading to the accident,” said the Angelidis family lawyer, Mr. Agamemnon Tatsis.
On December 24, 2017 and around 06:30 in the morning, Konstantinos Angelidis was riding his two-wheeled motorcycle on Vouliagmeni avenue, near Voula. At that point, Vouliagmeni Avenue has three main rerouting lanes. The presenter was in the center lane, while the bus driver was in the front lane. At that moment, the bus driver suddenly tried to move from the right lane to the left, passing through the center lane, where Konstantinos Angelidis was. In this way he suddenly entered the presenter’s course, who tried to avoid maneuvers, moving sharply to the right, but unable to avoid the collision.
The basis of the decision
The reasoning for the decision states that “the court determines that the bus driver is solely responsible for causing the accident in question, who due to his negligence, that is, inattention, that due to circumstances and was able to pay, did not always have his attention focused on the vehicle that drove. exercise the necessary management at all times, avoiding any conduct that could endanger other people “. In fact, as the judge explains, although the bus driver had to move along the right lane, “he did not check whether this movement poses a risk of obstruction to traffic and other road users, he did not take into account that the bus that he was driving during his maneuver, it would cover a great width of the boulevard, due to its great length and the fact that it was modular, whereas before the maneuver he did not make his intention known in time using the direction indicators ”.
As for the opponents’ claim that the bus driver can, by personal choice, modify the route by turning from a different road instead of the predetermined one and making a dangerous maneuver, but this is a measure that is often done by other drivers bus, the court ruled that:This is not enough to make the driver’s exit necessary, nor is it sufficient to undo the fact that the bus driver, slipping from the right main lane to the left, violated an article of the traffic code that requires the bus to be the right main lane ».
The decision also rejected the request for medical expertise, presented by the bus driver, explaining that the presenter’s state of health, two years after the accident, is considered stable and given.
Konstantinos Angelidis, due to his state of health, which as reported by his doctors, was placed in complete deprivation of legal assistance, has not shown a significant improvement in his state of health, as evidenced, among other things, by the testimony of his wife. There is no expectation of a significant improvement in this (ση) Furthermore, the judgment that no significant improvement is expected arises from the fact that he has not been treated for approximately two years after the accident, while he has already been put into deprivation total legal assistance precisely because of the permanence of their condition ”, explains the judge.
Complicity because he wasn’t wearing a helmet
It should be noted that the court recognizes a 30% complicity rate in Konstantinos Angelidis, as the use of a helmet was not confirmed. It turned out that Konstantinos Angelidis, although he had a relevant obligation, was not wearing a helmet at the time of the accident, Since no such thing was found at the crash site, nothing relevant was noted in the autopsy report, the wearing of a helmet by an eyewitness is not confirmed, while convincingly explained in the medical opinion presented by the defendants that their injuries occurred on open ground“Declare the decision, concluding that”the percentage of complicity of the driver of the machine is 30%, since the lack of use of the helmet is causally related to the magnitude of the bodily injuries and injuries suffered “.
The lawyer of the family of Agamemnon Tatsis
News from Greece and the world, as it happens, on Newsbomb.gr.
Read also:
The gene of Turkish barbarism: nationalism, jihad and the only way to Greece
