In February 2023 there was a serious accident between a driver and an e-biker in the Feldkirch district in Vorarlberg-de Two quarrels to the highest court about the money. He now decides: Electric Eagles, who do not pick up a protective helmet, can bear complicity. This also influences the claims for pain and suffering.
There is still no legal obligation for adults to wear a bicycle helmet – only children under the age of twelve. However, e-bike drivers still have to think twice. Because on time for the sunny Easter weekend, the Supreme Court publishes its decision on the “helmet error”.
Drivers rammed e-bikers
On February 2, 2023, an accident between a car and an e-bike took place in the Vorarlberg district of Feldkirch. The facts and therefore also liability seem to be clear: the cyclist was on a walking and cycling path, the prohibited driver forbidden the entrance to a gas station to bend back on street- he therefore ignored a prohibition sign. Because his vision was limited by a hedge, he overlooked the approaching e-bike driver and rammed him. The man suffered serious injury in the head and the court.
Bicycle helmet would have prevented a fifth of the pain
In all cases, a court conflict was made, established compensation for a total of 51,780 euros and the determination of the liability of the director – who did not want to admit. Finally, it turned out that the wounded person had a fifth less pain if he had worn a bicycle helmet – and that was not the case.
After the Regional Court of Feldkirch had accepted the only mistake of the suspect and the Innsbruck Higher Regional Court later also accepted this, the Supreme Court was on the move. And he has found a mistake: “It is enough to be carelessly against your own goods, which also includes health.”
“Helmmit Fault” influences the reimbursement for pain and suffering
When driving e-bike, an obligation must be attached to wear a helmet. This means that users of electric bicycles must assume that if they do not wear protective helmet, serious injuries can occur in the event of accidents. “Moreover, Life Experience shows that the importance and importance of wearing the helmet when managing e-bike is generally anchored in terms of an increased frequency of accident,” decides the Senate of the Supreme Court.
So the claims of the claimant are reduced by the so -man -feature helmet error – but according to the judgment, only the claims for pain and suffering are concerning, but not the compensation. Since a fifth of the pain of a helmet could have been prevented in the case of the case, this is also the reduction.
So the profession no longer only comes from Öamtc and Co., but now also from the Supreme Court in Vienna: protective helmet when driving on e-bike!
Source: Krone
I am Wallace Jones, an experienced journalist. I specialize in writing for the world section of Today Times Live. With over a decade of experience, I have developed an eye for detail when it comes to reporting on local and global stories. My passion lies in uncovering the truth through my investigative skills and creating thought-provoking content that resonates with readers worldwide.
