Civil Liability Law Review: Principles and Application

• These are review notes for civil liability law.

Principle of Non-Combination of Liabilities

• Non-accumulation of liability means there is no tortious remedy for contractual damages.
• When damage results from the non-performance of a contractual obligation, the remedy pursued by the obligee must be based on the law of contractual liability.
• To remedy the consequences of bodily harm sustained by a minor due to the breach of a safety contractual obligation, Article 1147 of the Civil Code, rather than Article 1384, paragraph 1, is applicable.

Principles of Extracontractual Civil Liability (Art. 1240)

• The legal fact is the source of civil liability.
• The source of non-contractual liability is the legal fact, that is, a voluntary or involuntary action that results in legal consequences.
• An accident is an example of legal fact, hence having to repair any damages from it.
• According to Article 1240 of the Civil Code, a civil offense is a deliberate illegal act that results in the obligation to compensate for harm caused to others.
• A quasi-offense is an unintentional illegal act that results in the obligation to repair the damage that has been caused and is governed by Article 1241 of the Civil Code.
• The quasi-contract is a voluntary lawful act that leads to the establishment of an obligation and is governed by Article 1300 et seq.

Conditions for Tort Civil Liability:

• Three conditions must be met to engage an individual's non-contractual (tort) liability under common law:
• A causal link
• Damage
• An act that creates liability.
• Special systems may adhere to different schemes (defective product liability, traffic accidents).

Liability for Things

• The custodian of an item must first establish material intervention in order to engage their liability for it, since there must have been contact with the source of the harm.
• Four rules summarize liability for inert things:
• The victim needs to demonstrate the causative role in the damage, which is sometimes referred to as the active role by the Cour de cassation.
• The Cour de cassation determines active role through the criteria of the thing's abnormality, either through lack of maintenance or an internal defect.
• The victim is exempt from having to show the custodian's personal fault in causing the thing to sustain damage.
• The custodian cannot contest liability by demonstrating a lack of personal blame; liability for the action of things is absolute.
• The custodian can contest their liability as custodian by attacking the causal role of something, proving it only had a passive role in the damage, or demonstrating the damage was the result of an event of force majeure or someone else's actions..
• Things in motion are an exception to this rule; if they have come into contact with the place of damage, the active role is presumed and the victim does not have to show that anything is abnormal.

Landmark Cases

• Arrêt Teffaine: The Court of Cassation determined that the shipowner was accountable notwithstanding the absence of the owner's fault when a tugboat boiler exploded and killed a worker.
• Arrêt Jand'heur: A young girl was hurt in a traffic accident involving a truck, belonging to a business; the court determined that the custodian was entirely liable.

Applicability Requirements

• The application of liability for things involves demonstrating cumulatively four conditions:
• The things
• The active act of the thing
• The guardian of the thing
• Damage

Damage

• The harm inflicted by the item must cause the victim actual, direct, personal, and definite harm.
• French law grants the right to compensation for a number of kinds of damages:
• Physical harm causing injury of death.
• Financial harm, which causes the victim to lose money or property.
• Emotional trauma that affects the victim's mental health.
• Loss of a chance, that is, the chance of attempting something.
• Injury by reflection, suffered by a third party as a result of harm sustained by the primary victim. The responsibility for the action of things implies the existence of a thing.
• In principle, anything, whether movable or immovable, tangible or intangible, in motion or motionless, flawed or not, can be a source of liability.
• However, some exceptions apply such as:
• Common things belonging to no one.
• Things without a master or owner.
• The human body.
• Things administered by a special rule.

The Active Fact of the Thing

• The damage must be caused by the thing's active deed.
• The defect must be the source of the damage, there must have been a role active.
• The thing has to be abnormal in terms of how it works, how it is arranged, or how it is.

Three Hypothesis

• The presumption of active role applies when anything is both moving and in contact; the victim is only required to provide proof that the item is in motion.
• The active role presumption is rejected in the absence of contact; the victim must demonstrate the thing's active role by establishing its anomaly.
• When something is stationary, it is more probable that damage is attributable to the victim’s actions as opposed to the intervention of an immobile thing.

The Custody of the Thing

• The last requirement for establishing liability for the action of things is that the caretaker of the thing has factual control over it.
• Identifying the guardian is easy: it is both the owner and the person holding the thing at the moment the harm happened.
• The Court of Cassation ruled in the “Franck” decision on December 2, 1941, the legal custodian is not liable for the material keeping of the item.
• The responsible guardian is the one who has control over the object, and that is usage, direction, and control.

Four Remarks

• The owner is assumed to be the guardian, even if a servant is using it.
• The ability to distinguish is not a requirement for being a guardian of the object.
• There can only be one guardian of the item.
• The civil chamber of the Court of Cassation has distinguished between:
• The structure's integrity, which is the manufacturer.
• The conduct of the item is the legal custodian

Liability for the Act of Others

• The delegate who acts without exceeding the bounds of the assignment given to him by his principal does not engage their liability.
• There can be no finding of personal fault against those delegates while carrying out damaging acts.
• The agent who is found guilty of a crime for intentionally, even at the request of the principal, committing an offense that has harmed a third party, assumes civil liability for the same.
• The Blieck decision marked the recognition of new instances of external accountability.
• The enumeration was regarded either exhaustive/restrictive of unique regimes of guilt for the action of others.
• The Court of Cassation permitted forest owners to hold the association in charge of M. Blieck, who had set fire to the forest, accountable in this decision.

Facts

• M. Blieck, a mentally impaired person housed in a specialized educational facility, started a fire in a forest.
• The proprietors of the land where the forest is located then file a lawsuit against the educational center.
• The Limoges Court of Appeal decided to uphold the educational center's responsibility for M. Blieck's acts.
• The Court of Cassation ruled that the educational center "had agreed to organize and oversee the way of life of this handicapped person on a permanent basis".
• It considered that "the educational center should answer on his behalf, within the meaning of Article 1384, paragraph 1, of the Civil Code" and "was obligated to repair the damages he had caused."

Requirements:

• The jurisprudence recognizes two cases:
• Physical or moral persons in permanent charge of an individual’s quality of life are responsible for losses the individual causes.
• Legal entities must manage the activities of its members and are held accountable of damage incurred.

A Fault by Supervisee:

• It has trend for the judiciary to ask a supervisee to have committed a fault.

Regime of Liability for Actions of Others.

• People held liable for the actions of others are unable to clear themselves of the action upon proving no wrong was committed.
• Third party accountability is a responsibility in the same way as:
• Liability for property
• Parental accountability for the child.
• The liability of principals for the actions of their agents
• Accountability for harm caused by animals.
• Accountability for harmful products.

Explore the principles of civil liability law, including the non-combination of liabilities and the role of legal facts in extracontractual liability. Understand how Article 1240 of the Civil Code defines civil offenses and their consequences. Review key concepts for effective legal analysis.