Decisions regarding a fatal road accident based only on road traffic accident report violate the right to life due to ineffective investigation
JUDGMENT
Fatih Çakır and Merve Nisa Çakır v. Turkey 05.06.2018 (no. 54558/11)
SUMMARY
Procedures regarding compensation for a road accident caused by the inappropriateness of the road. The applicants complained that the authorities had not taken the necessary safety measures on the road and that the court proceedings which followed were inadequate. Violation of Article 2 (right to life) because the judgments were based only on the Traffic Police report.
PROVISION
Article 2
PRINCIPAL FACTS
The applicants, Fatih Çakır and Merve Nisa Çakır, a father and daughter, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1979 and 2007 respectively and live in İzmir (Turkey).
The case concerned a car accident which had killed their wife and mother.
On 25 October 2008, while Mr Çakır was driving in İzmir with his wife and daughter in the back seat, he lost control of his car when the road curved into a sharp bend. The car dropped into an empty concrete canal. Mr Çakır’s wife, Yeşim, died and Ms Çakır was slightly injured.
Mr Çakır brought compensation proceedings against the local authorities, claiming in particular that a damaged crash barrier, which could have prevented the car from dropping into the canal, had not been repaired. However, his claims were rejected in 2011. Relying essentially on a traffic accident report, the administrative courts found that Mr Çakır was responsible for the accident as he had lost control of the car, despite a warning sign about the sharp bend ahead.
Relying in particular on Article 2 (right to life), the applicants complained that the domestic authorities had failed to take the necessary safety measures on the road, which had led to the death of their wife and mother. They further alleged that the ensuing judicial proceedings had been inadequate, and had not established whether the authorities had been responsible for the death as the courts had based their decisions solely on the traffic accident report. The applicants argued in particular that a technical expert opinion had been required to be able to ascertain whether Mr Çakır had lost control of his car as a result of a problem with the road.
THE DECISION OF THE COURT
Violation of Article 2 (investigation)
Just satisfaction: EUR 10,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 2,000 (costs and expenses)(echrcaselaw.com editing).
