چکیده:
In the event that an accident is caused by the fault of a third party, the Social Security Organization can, after compensating the injured party, seek recourse from the loss-causing party. The subject of this article is the method of exercising this right of recourse in the event of a division of damages between the injured party and the loss-causing party due to joint fault. According to some policies, in such cases, the Social Security Organization can seek recourse from the third party up to the full extent of their responsibility. This solution, which gives priority to the Social Security Organization, severely reduces the injured party's right to compensation. In the author's opinion, the Social Security Organization has the right of recourse to the third party in proportion to their responsibility. Furthermore, if the loss-causing party is ordered to compensate for various items of damages (damage to property, moral damages, bodily injury, etc.), the Social Security Organization's recourse is subject to a dual limitation: the Social Security Organization only has the right of recourse from that part of the civil liability debt that it has compensated, and that too in proportion to the third party's responsibility. The mentioned rules are applicable in the case of the perpetrator of the accident being sentenced to pay blood money (Diyah).
خلاصه ماشینی:
First Discussion - Joint Fault and the Amount of the Social Security Organization's Recourse First Section - Statement of the Problem and Possible Solutions The assumption of the problem is that, based on the rules of civil liability, damages must be divided between the injured party and the defendant in the liability lawsuit; equally or in proportion to the manner of intervention or on another basis.
PHILLIPS READY MIX (State of Ohio), this result was clearly confirmed by the trial court, and the appellate court also rejected the defense of the plaintiff's lawyers, based on the fact that in the case of joint fault, a similar entity to Social Security should only have the right of recourse to the extent of the tortfeasor's conviction, and not up to the full limit of their liability, citing the law (paragraph 54 of Article 7132 of the Revised Ohio Code passed in 8891) (SCHAFER, P.
Currently, based on judicial practice and the position of the Court of Cassation, the Social Security Fund has the right of recourse to him up to the limit of the tortfeasor's liability, and therefore, in the above example, it receives 00008 francs from the tortfeasor, and the injured party does not receive any amount through the rules of civil liability (.
The first part is completely logical, but the second part is unacceptable: In the case where the injured party benefits simultaneously from Social Security and the civil liability of the tortfeasor, why should his right to receive damages be limited to the damages he is entitled to based on the general rules of liability?
(
, 
, 
)
