Strict liability

Responsibility for harm caused by activities that create an increased danger to others is established by Article 948 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus.

Legal entities and citizens whose activities are associated with increased danger to others (use of vehicles, mechanisms, high-voltage electrical energy, atomic energy, explosives, potent poisons, etc.; construction and other related activities, etc.) are obliged to compensate for harm caused by a source of increased danger, unless they prove that the harm arose as a result of force majeure or the victim's intent.

The obligation to compensate for harm is imposed on the legal entity or citizen who owns the source of increased danger by right of ownership or on any other legal basis, including the right of lease (with the exception of vehicle lease with crew (Article 611 of the Civil Code), by power of attorney for the right to operate a vehicle, by virtue of an order from the relevant authority to transfer the source of increased danger to it, etc.

What is a source of increased danger? A source of increased danger is an activity related to the operation of certain objects, the special properties of which create an increased probability of causing harm to others due to the impossibility of full control over it by humans, as well as activities related to the use, transportation, storage of items, substances, and other objects of industrial or economic purpose possessing the same properties.

Most often, increased danger arises from the use of moving objects that cannot be stopped instantly (e.g., vehicles, machine tools). Sources of increased danger also include activities related to the use of potent poisons, explosives, high-voltage currents, etc.

Here are a few examples from judicial practice

practices in cases of compensation for harm caused by a source of increased danger.

V., while driving a car at night, hit K., who was running across the roadway in an unauthorized place without reflective clothing. The victim died on the spot from the injuries sustained. The deceased's son filed a lawsuit against V. for compensation of moral damage.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 969 of the Civil Code, compensation for moral damage is carried out regardless of the fault of the person causing the harm in cases where harm is caused to the life or health of a citizen by a source of increased danger.

Since K.'s death occurred as a result of the use of a vehicle, which is a source of increased danger, its owner is liable for compensation for the harm caused, regardless of fault.

The parents of a minor child filed a lawsuit against the owner of a bull terrier dog, which, while on a playground without a muzzle in the absence of the owner, bit their child. They requested, based on Article 948 of the Civil Code, to recover compensation for harm caused to their son's health, as well as compensation for moral damage.

Can the actions of the dog owner be considered as creating increased danger to others?

The bull terrier is included in the List of potentially dangerous dog breeds, approved by the Resolution of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food of the Republic of Belarus of December 12, 2001 No. 40 "On Certain Issues of Breeding, Keeping, Importing into the Republic of Belarus, and Training Owners of Potentially Dangerous Dog Breeds". In accordance with the Rules for Keeping Domestic Dogs, Cats, and for the Capture of Stray Animals in Populated Areas of the Republic of Belarus, approved by the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus of June 4, 2001 No. 834, dog owners are obliged to take dogs out of apartments or other isolated premises, as well as from isolated territories to public places when necessary.

on a short leash and in a muzzle, with the exception of puppies under three months of age and decorative dogs up to 25 cm at the withers, which can be walked on a leash without a muzzle, as well as walking dogs in areas designated for these purposes by local executive and administrative bodies. Liability for violation of the rules for keeping domestic and (or) predatory animals is provided for by Art. 15.47 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Republic of Belarus.

Thus, the owner of a potentially dangerous breed dog grossly violated the specified Rules, which led to harm to the health of the plaintiffs' son. The claims for compensation for the damage caused are lawful and justified.

The burden of proving circumstances that exclude the liability of the owner of a source of increased danger (force majeure or intent of the victim) lies with the owner of the source of increased danger. The possibility of exemption from liability in whole or in part is allowed in cases where the harm was caused, although as a result of the action of a source of increased danger, but this was facilitated by gross negligence of the victim himself (para. 2 of Art. 952 of the Civil Code). However, when harm is caused to life or health of a citizen, refusal to compensate for the harm is not allowed.

For example, a truck driver, while performing his work duties at OAO "G", in violation of the requirements of the Instruction on labor protection for drivers, before starting his route, began to inflate a tire without removing it from the vehicle and without placing it in the protective guard located in the garage. When the pressure increased, the tire burst, resulting in the driver sustaining serious bodily injuries, from which he died in the hospital. Following the fact of causing

an employee was injured, an investigation was conducted, and an accident report was drawn up. The spouse and son of the deceased filed a lawsuit against the employer, as the owner of a source of increased danger, for compensation of moral damages in connection with the loss of a loved one.

Given that the process of inflating tires creates increased danger to others, local labor protection instructions for employees engaged in the repair and maintenance of vehicles provide for special protective equipment; in this regard, this activity can be classified as a source of increased danger. The claims of the plaintiffs were satisfied by the court.

Damage caused as a result of the interaction of sources of increased danger with their owners is compensated on a general basis (Article 933 of the Civil Code). This means that the person found guilty will be responsible for the damage caused. For example, in a collision of two cars, compensation for damage is imposed on the owner of the vehicle whose actions are recognized as not complying with the Traffic Rules. At the same time, when damage is caused to third parties, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 948 of the Civil Code, owners of sources of increased danger bear joint and several liability to the victim.

For example, if a pedestrian or a passenger of one of the cars suffers bodily harm as a result of a collision between two cars, when deciding on compensation for moral damages to the victim, the owners of sources of increased danger will compensate for the damage jointly and severally.

Head of the Department for Supervision of Compliance with the Law of Judicial Decisions in Civil Cases I. Titkova