Analysis of Corresponding Damages in the Light of the Theory of Collective Damages

Note 3 of article 8 of the Compulsory Insurance Law adopted in 2016, in a new and unprecedented case, considers the financial damages caused by traffic accidents compensable only to the extent of the corresponding damages to the most expensive reasonable vehicle through third party insurance or the culprit of the accident. In fact, the corresponding damage is the maximum damage that the owner of an unconventional car (the injured person) can receive from the culprit of the accident for the damage, even if the damage to the unconventional car is more than that amount. Therefore the purpose of this study is to examine the question on what basis and for what purpose did the legislature take such an initiative so that it can be used by recognizing and expanding it in other similar laws and regulations.

In this article, with a descriptive - analytical study, an attempt has been made to explain and examine the reasons for the above problem by using library resources and reading and searching books, articles and related theoretical topics.

Traffic accidents are one of the most common and important injuries that most people in the community are always in touch with. This has caused the legislator to pay constant attention to the insurance law and to make changes and amendments to it over time along with the needs of the day. The provision for corresponding damages in the new compulsory insurance law includes a provision that implies a special system for compensating for financial damages caused by traffic accidents. This is because the corresponding damage to the most expensive reasonable car can be applied not only in the existence of third party insurance, but also in the event that the car of culprit of the accident has not valid third party insurance, Will be applied. For this reason it is difficult or impossible to justify this sentence in accordance with the usual rules of civil liability based on the rule of no harm and full compensation. Loss protection through assurance of payment and compensation and paying attention to the social and financial inequalities of individuals shows the legislator's concern through this law.

The present paper shows that the legislature in anticipating the corresponding damage with the aim of ensuring compensation and protection of the injured party has used the theory of collectivization for damages and reduction of social costs through the loss distribution system. The theory of collective compensation, by involving individuals in the society in the payment of damages, removes compensation from the personal state and turns it into a social matter. Thus, contrary to the importance and role of fault in traditional theories of civil liability, what is placed in the first place in the collectivization of compensation is not the responsibility of individuals or the punishment and deterrence of the deficient person, but compensation. Therefore, in the corresponding damage, it is the accident itself that is more important than the person responsible for the accident and it causes the application of a special system of compensation, which ultimately leads to social solidarity. Thus, the legislator has rightly used its possibility in applying social considerations and economic necessities in amending the law of compulsory insurance and traffic accidents.