On Tuesday, the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court is to respond to Three questions Asked by the District Court in Poznań in the case reference number act: III CZP 32/24.
The questions were asked to supplement the compensation from the perpetrator for the accident damage Land Rover. The insurance company paid the holder to 210 thousand. PLN, and he valued the damage at 270 thousand. zloty. According to the insurer, the injured person was required to minimize the damage and should use the parts and varnishes proposed to him with discounts 15 and 40 percent, respectively. The District Court doubted and asked such questions:
- Whether the injured partyy, which repaired the car, but the repair price he paid was not increased by VAT, and the tax repairing did not pay it, should receive compensation with liability insurance?
- If the injured person restored the car to the state before the damage, then compensation should include actual repair costs, or should it be determined according to hypothetical repair costs?
- If It is permissible to grant compensation to the injured party, including discounts for spare parts and paint material that the insurer offers to the victim?
Read also: Do you insure your car in leasing? Check what to watch out for and how to report damage
There is no one case -law
The Supreme Court already answered similar questions, but still not clearly. For example, the District Court had no doubt that the injured party who is not able to deduct the tax on goods and services is entitled to full, i.e. also covering this tax, compensation corresponding to the costs of restoring the vehicle to the state before the damage. In jurisprudence, there is a discrepancy still to capture VAT in compensation, when the injured person repairs the so -called the economic system, i.e. it will not pay it.
In addition According to the Supreme Court, compensation is due to the actual incurring of expenses for the repair of the car. Still, however, if the repair has not been made, the courts determine compensation according to the cost estimate.
See also: A controversial resolution of the Supreme Court. It is about the amount of compensation from OC
As for discounts, the Supreme Court in the judgment of October 6, 2022 (reference number III CZP 119/22) stated that in the formula necessary and economically justified repair costs there is no automatism, and in particular the unambiguous and top -down determination that compensation may be reduced by discounts and relief for parts and materials for repairing the vehicle. At the same time, the possibility of taking into account discounts and concessions cannot be excluded in advanceif in a specific case it can be considered that they fall within the necessary and economically justified repair costs.
