Court time after an accident

Those responsible for road accidents often leave the scene of the collision, thereby trying to avoid the punishment provided for by law. But such behavior only aggravates the driver’s situation, because the police have many tools and methods to catch them. Hiding from the scene of an accident leads to serious consequences, so you need to be prepared for anything. According to a court decision, this may be a fine, deprivation of the right to drive, or arrest. In the process of determining the sanction, all key moments of the event and the psychological state of the offender are taken into account.

Characteristics of the definition of “leaving the scene of an accident”

The rules do not clearly state what is meant by the phrase “leaving the scene of an accident.” But it means an attempt by the culprit to leave in order to avoid possible consequences. But at the same time, pulling to the side of the road to remove an obstacle on the highway does not equate to this. By leaving the scene of an accident at will, a citizen is at great risk. Lack of documentary evidence leads to the following consequences:

• Blame for the accident, even if the cause was the actions of a third party.
• Administrative or criminal liability for attempting to escape, depending on the situation.
• Full compensation for the harm received by the victim, including moral and material, since insurers refuse to pay it due to the absence of a second party.
• Compensation for damage to health, up to lifelong benefits.

Having learned about the consequences provided for the violator in 2019, you should realize that leaving the scene of an accident is not recommended unless there are compelling reasons for doing so. The participant loses the opportunity to check the correctness of the documentation after the arrival of traffic police inspectors.

Punishment for leaving the scene of an accident

The Code of Administrative Offenses (clause 2 of Article 12.27) states that a motorist who fled the scene of a car accident bears the following responsibility:

• Deprivation of a driver's license for at least a year, and a maximum of one and a half;
• Administrative arrest for several days (up to 15).

The imposition of a monetary penalty in favor of the state is not provided for under this article. It is necessary to focus on the fact that the type of punishment and its measure (number of days of arrest and months without a license) are determined by the judge. In most cases, citizens are deprived of their identity rather than their freedom.

Not all citizens, according to current legislation, can be arrested even for several days.

The following persons cannot be deprived of their liberty:

• Women with young children;
• Citizens with disabilities who have received the first or second disability group;
• Women who are pregnant;
• Citizens undergoing military service (contract or fixed-term);
• Employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, fire brigade and Federal Customs Service.

Intended punishment

Drivers who are afraid of the consequences are hiding from the scene of an accident, but for this violation of traffic rules in 2021 they face deprivation of their rights and, in addition, liability under criminal law. This usually happens if a person is drunk, there are injured or dead people, or a parked car has been damaged. Also, sometimes the culprit simply does not want to wait for the inspector to arrive. Many violators count on the rapid expiration of the term, after which they will no longer bear the punishment prescribed by law. But for leaving the scene of an accident in 2019 with victims, the following is provided:

• Fine from 80 thousand rubles. up to the amount of income received for 6 months.
• Forced community service for up to 360 hours.
• Restriction of freedom for 90 days.
• Prison for up to 1 year.

If there is an accident without injuries, then the driver’s driver’s license is taken away, he is prohibited from driving for up to 1.5 years, or his freedom is restricted for 15 days.

In the first case, criminal liability is provided, since the culprit leaves the victim in a dangerous situation: many deaths in road accidents could have been prevented by prompt delivery of the person to the hospital. In this situation, an investigation is also ordered, and the three-month statute of limitations does not apply.

They have been searching for the criminal for several years, and if caught, they will be additionally charged with hiding material evidence and evading responsibility. Security cameras are used in the process, so it is rare for anyone to reach the end of the statute of limitations without receiving a notice from the court. Reconciliation of the parties by mutual consent is allowed, but only in minor accidents.

It is important to know! If the offender leaves nearby and returns before law enforcement services arrive, this is not considered a serious offense. Therefore, he will not face severe punishment for leaving the scene of an accident without injuries in 2021. In controversial situations, all key details of the event are considered.

Aggravating circumstances

Deprivation of a license for leaving the scene of an accident is not the worst punishment. More severe sanctions await the culprit for this offense committed while intoxicated. Drinking alcohol before a trip is strictly prohibited by traffic rules and is therefore an aggravating circumstance. In addition, the Criminal Code provides for the initiation of proceedings for leaving victims with wounds and injuries, or failure to provide first aid. In this case, it will not be possible to resolve the global issue. If this resulted in death, the situation would be classified as manslaughter. The case is examined in court, and instead of a lawyer, the culprit should find himself a lawyer.

Unintentional abandonment

Sometimes, due to inattention, people leave the scene of a collision, for example, when a car is damaged in a parking lot. In this case, the claim is also presented to the person in accordance with the established procedure. Unintentional abandonment may be recognized as:

• The accident occurred due to limited visibility or poor weather conditions and was not immediately detected by drivers.
• The impact or squeak from the contact was not heard due to the loud music in the car.
• The accident was not noticed due to the absence of grinding or loud sounds that could be heard in the cabin.

The rules do not provide for the concept of leaving a place without intent. However, the court considers each individual case individually, and it can be recognized as such if there were no injured persons and the damage caused was minimal. The presence or absence of notification to the traffic police about the incident is taken into account.

When is it permissible to leave the scene of an accident?

Traffic rules provide for situations where after a collision a person has the right to leave the scene of the accident. For which actions there will be no administrative punishment:

• When it is impossible to transport victims by car to the nearest medical facility. In this situation, it is necessary to leave the other party with your registration data, policy number, personal information and return to the scene of the incident.
• When there are no injuries in the accident and after assessing the circumstances, the parties agree that there is no need to call the traffic police to register the incident.
• The accident involved two vehicles that were legally insured. The harm caused is not controversial and was recorded using the European protocol.
• The need to take a pregnant woman to the maternity hospital due to the onset of labor or bleeding.

Hurry dictated by an attempt to catch a departing train or bus or get to an important event (discharge from a maternity hospital, wedding, birthday), even if the person left his data to the other party, is not considered an excuse. Turning yourself in, filing a confession statement, assisting law enforcement agencies, and voluntarily paying damages will help mitigate liability.

Leaving the scene of an accident

By chance, it became necessary to study judicial practice (in the area of ​​interest there were decisions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation) on bringing to administrative responsibility for an offense under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation – “leaving by the driver, in violation of the Traffic Rules, the scene of a traffic accident in which he was a participant.”

In itself, the consideration of cases of administrative offenses provided for in Ch. 12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, is, of course, not the best format for discussions about high matters. However, the issue of leaving the scene of an accident is interesting, in my opinion, and often goes beyond ordinary “collisions and abandonment.”

I'll start with the main aspect.

1. Traffic accident

An accident is an event that occurred during the movement of a vehicle on the road and with its participation, in which people were killed or injured, vehicles, structures, cargo were damaged, or other material damage was caused (clause 1.2 of the Road Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation, approved by Government Decree RF dated October 23, 1993 N 1090 “On the Rules of the Road”, hereinafter referred to as traffic rules).

The term is defined very broadly: an accident is not only a collision or collision with a standing vehicle, but also a collision with an obstacle, and other cases related to the definition from the traffic rules.

Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation dated June 18, 1996 N 328 “On measures to implement the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated June 29, 1995 N 647”, although it lost force in March 2015, the list of types of accidents (Appendix 6 to the Instructions for recording traffic accidents in internal affairs bodies) is fully consistent with current legislation: collision, rollover, collision with a standing vehicle, collision with an obstacle and others. A broad classification can be found, for example, in the Order of Rosavtodor dated May 12, 2015 N 853-r “On the publication and application of ODM 218.6.015-2015 “Recommendations for the recording and analysis of traffic accidents on the roads of the Russian Federation” ( Appendix G. Forms for presenting the results of data analysis on road accidents on roads and streets).

2. Leaving the scene of an accident

In relation to the issue of an administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, it should also be noted that the corresponding action of the driver forms the objective side of this administrative offense in cases where an accident (let me remind you: “an event that occurred while driving along the road”) occurred both on the road and within the adjacent territory ( Clause 11 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation of October 24, 2006 N 18 “On some issues that arise for courts when applying the Special Part of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences”).

Thus, the already wide range of cases covered by the term road accident is expanded by the interpretation of the RF Armed Forces disposition of Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation also to adjacent territories.

At the same time, there are cases when a participant in an accident is obliged/has the right to leave the scene of an accident - such cases are indicated in paragraphs. 2.6, 2.6.1 Traffic rules. For example, in emergency cases, the driver involved in an accident is obliged to send the victims along the way, and if this is not possible, take them in their vehicle to the nearest medical organization, provide their last name, vehicle registration plate and return to the scene of the incident (clause 2.6 of the traffic rules ).

And clause 2.6.1 of the traffic rules, in turn, is overloaded with repetition of words, but, in essence, is quite understandable and logical. I will only note that the clause was written exclusively under the guise of a road accident “collision” (in fact, according to the text of the clause), and, therefore, the remaining borderline cases are beyond legal certainty.

3. Practice of the RF Armed Forces

In the practice of the RF Armed Forces, I discovered many interesting cases, some of which I will present for review.

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of July 15, 2014 N 19-AD14-8. He left and returned.

A person hit an obstacle (this, let me remind you, is an incident in which a vehicle ran over or hit a stationary object: a bridge support, pole, tree, fence, etc.), and after the collision went to the traffic police department to register an accident.

By the decision of the magistrate, the person was found guilty of committing an administrative offense under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, and was subjected to administrative punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of one year.

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation did not agree with this position, canceled the resolution and indicated the following: “As seen from the case materials, Kharchenko V.Yu. reported to the police about the event, at the time of the arrival of police officers Kharchenko V.Yu. was at the scene of a traffic accident, the circumstances of the incident were established with his participation.

This follows from the written explanations of V.Yu. Kharchenko. and the explanations given by him during the trial (case files 6, 26 - 27, 30 - 31, 42 - 43), the report of the traffic police inspector of the ORDPS OGIBDD OMVD of Russia for the Kochubeevsky district of B. and his testimony given during the trial (pp. 2, 40, 43), diagrams of the scene of a traffic accident (pp. 4).

The foregoing indicates that the requirements of paragraph 2.5 of the Road Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation Kharchenko V.Yu. were completed.

The fact that immediately after hitting an obstacle Kharchenko V.Yu. went to the State Traffic Safety Inspectorate of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs in the city of Nevinnomyssk to register a traffic accident, does not indicate the validity of the magistrate’s conclusion about the presence in his actions of an administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences.”

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of March 11, 2021 N 39-AD16-1. A stone from under the wheels.

A stone flew out from under the wheels of the vehicle and damaged the windshield of another vehicle moving in the same direction.

A person driving a vehicle from under the wheels of which a stone was thrown was subjected to administrative punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of one year (leaving the scene of an accident was charged).

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation found that it was impossible to agree with the judicial acts that took place in the case: “At the same time, this event occurred due to circumstances beyond the control of the driver of the car “<...>” I.V. Savchuk, without any actions on his part, to foresee He did not have the opportunity to take this event, as well as the onset of consequences in the form of damage to the windshield of the car following in the same direction.

The event that occurred does not meet the criteria of a traffic accident in the sense given to this concept in Article 2 of the Law on Road Safety and in paragraph 1.2 of the Traffic Rules, and is not such.

The conclusion of the courts about the presence of Savchuk I.V. in the act. the objective side of the administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses cannot be considered justified.”

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of August 1, 2014 N 45-AD14-11. Hitting an animal.

The person hit a dog, after which he left the scene of the accident, and therefore was found guilty of committing an administrative offense under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, and was subjected to administrative punishment in the form of administrative arrest for a period of five days.

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation agreed with the qualification of the actions of this person, but slightly corrected the lower authorities: “Having left the scene of the traffic accident, Tatarnev S.V. committed an administrative offense, liability for which is provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences.

*

The list of circumstances aggravating administrative liability is enshrined in Article 4.3 of the Code of the Russian Federation and is exhaustive.

Appointing Tatarneva S.V. administrative punishment in the form of administrative arrest for a period of five days, the judge of the Pervouralsk City Court of the Sverdlovsk Region indicated that he takes into account as an aggravating circumstance that bodily harm was caused to the animal, resulting in his suffering and the suffering of a minor child.

Meanwhile, this circumstance cannot be taken into account as an aggravating factor. The city court judge erroneously actually expanded the list of circumstances aggravating administrative liability established by Article 4.3 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences.”

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of August 26, 2014 N 41-AD14-11. Hitting the hatch.

The driver hit a manhole and then left the scene of the accident in which he was a participant. To be more precise: when making a left turn maneuver, the rear wheels of the semi-trailer fell into the hatch, and, having driven away, the driver stopped and saw that the reinforced concrete slab had been crushed and the well was damaged. He left the scene of the incident because... I didn’t know that the incident needed to be reported anywhere.

The driver was found guilty of committing an administrative offense under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, and was subjected to administrative punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of one year.

The RF Armed Forces fully agreed with the driver’s guilt: “The case materials contain the explanations of A.A. Yamshchikov. (ld. 4), in which he indicated that on November 16, 2013 at approximately 02:00, while driving a car of the brand “<...>” with a semi-trailer on the street. Zavodskoy in the village of Nizhny Salovsk, while making a left turn maneuver, the rear wheels of the semi-trailer fell into the hatch, having driven away, he stopped and saw that a reinforced concrete slab had been crushed and the well was damaged, he left the scene, did not know that the incident needed to be reported anywhere .

Explanations of Yamshchikov A.A. are consistent with the explanations of eyewitness B. (case file 5), the content of which indicates that Yamshchikov A.A. did not dispute the fact that the well was damaged.

The event that occurred meets the criteria of a traffic accident in accordance with paragraph 1.2 of the Traffic Rules and Article 2 of the Federal Law of December 10, 1995 N 196-FZ “On Road Safety”.

The fact that Yamshchikov A.A. became a participant in a traffic accident, obliged him to comply with the requirements of paragraph 2.5 of the Traffic Rules.”

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 6, 2015 N 70-AD15-2. Hitting a lying object.

A particularly interesting case, because... well illustrates the problem of the relationship between the very broad term road accident and the disposition of Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, which does not contain any restrictions or clarifications.

The person hit a metal object lying on the road, which caused damage to his vehicle, and then drove away. It would seem that you can meet anything on the road, only the vehicle is damaged; by telling the police “hello, I ran into a piece of iron,” you can quite well surprise a law enforcement representative with such news.

But no, the person was subjected to administrative punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of 1 year. Here's to you, grandma, and St. George's Day: the vehicle was damaged due to the fact that someone left a certain metal object on the road, and the right to drive was deprived.

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation completely agreed with the guilt of the person, unfortunately, but fortunately, I remembered Art. 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation: “As can be seen from the case materials, on November 30, 2014 at 11:30 p.m. Pogosyan S.V., while driving a car with a state registration plate <...> on the Noyabrsk-Vyngapurovsky highway, hit a person lying on the road a metal object, which caused damage to his vehicle, after which, in violation of paragraph 2.5 of the Traffic Rules, he left the scene of a traffic accident in which he was a participant.

*

Leaving the scene of the traffic accident, Pogosyan S.V. committed an administrative offense, liability for which is provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences.

*

Based on the legal position set out in the Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated December 7, 2010 N 1702-О-О “On the refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of citizen Oleg Aleksandrovich Krivodanov about the violation of his constitutional rights by part 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses and provision of paragraph 2.5 of the Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation", an administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, in the absence of harmful consequences of leaving the scene of a traffic accident that did not cause harm to health or major damage and did not constitute a significant violation of the protected public relations - may, in accordance with Article 2.9 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, be recognized by the law enforcement agency as insignificant and not entail administrative punishment.

Taking into account the above and the circumstances that what was committed by Pogosyan S.V. the act did not entail harmful consequences, harm to health or major damage as a result of the traffic accident was not caused to anyone, there was no significant violation of protected public relations, there are grounds for recognizing the administrative offense as insignificant.”

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of September 18, 2015 N 78-AD15-4. The absence of damage to the vehicle of the person who violated the traffic rules does not indicate the absence of an accident.

This case breaks the “mandatory contact” template. Although, in principle, the RF Armed Forces previously clarified this nuance in civil disputes (for example, Determination of the RF Armed Forces dated March 4, 2014 No. 16-КГ13-26). The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation very correctly, in my opinion, draws attention to the fact that there is a concept of “direct cause-and-effect relationship” and oblige potential victims in all cases to go “head to head” under the threat of further reference to paragraph. 2 clause 10.1 of the Traffic Regulations is a very dubious approach.

The person obstructed the movement of another vehicle moving in the opposite direction. The victim, who was driving this other vehicle, avoided the collision and his vehicle flew onto the sidewalk and hit trees.

The culprit referred to the fact that there was no damage to the front part of his vehicle, but the courts were adamant: the person was subjected to administrative punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of one year.

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation left the appealed decisions unchanged: “06/12/2014 at about 16:00 at the intersection of Zheleznodorozhnaya and General Khazov streets in the city of Pushkin of St. Petersburg Tabachkov D.A., driving a vehicle brand “<...>”, state registration plate < ...>, when carrying out the maneuver of turning onto General Khazov Street, thereby creating an obstacle to the movement of a car of brand <...>, state registration plate <...>, the owner of which is G., moving in the opposite direction, as a result of which the car driven by G. was leaving from a collision with the above-mentioned vehicle, flew onto the sidewalk and hit the trees, and Tabachkov D.A. in violation of the requirements of paragraph 2.5 of the Traffic Rules, he left the scene of a traffic accident in which he was a participant.

Explanations of the participants in the traffic accident G. and Tabachkov D.A., testimony of an eyewitness to the traffic accident Tomey Yu.S., who was driving a car following a vehicle driven by G. traffic police inspectors of the State Traffic Safety Inspectorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Pushkinsky district of St. Petersburg N. and M., interviewed at the court hearing as witnesses, are consistent with each other and with other evidence, and were reasonably recognized by the courts as reliable regarding the circumstances of the offense.

Under such circumstances, the courts came to the correct conclusion that the road accident was in a direct cause-and-effect relationship with the actions of the driver D.A. Tabachkov, however, the fact that the latter became a participant in the road accident obliged him comply with the requirements of paragraph 2.5 of the Traffic Rules.

The fact that there is no damage to the front part of the car brand “<…>”, state registration plate <…>, as indicated by Tabachkov D.A. in the complaint filed with the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, does not affect the qualification of the administrative offense charged to him, provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences.”

Statute of limitations for misdemeanors

If drivers leave the scene of an accident without good reason, they can avoid punishment only after the statute of limitations has expired. After recording the event, interviewing witnesses and drawing up all the required documentation, the police begin searching for the offender.

It is important to know! The provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses give 90 days for all actions. These include search work and filing charges for committing a violation. After the expiration of 90 days, it is illegal to hold the driver accountable and draw up a resolution in his name. But if there were deaths in the accident, then the search for the culprit will take three years.

If a person, having hit or crashed into another car, fled the scene of the crime, this is considered an aggravating circumstance. This is subject to administrative and criminal liability. In such a situation, a person loses the opportunity to control the correctness of filling out the protocol and drawing up a diagram of what happened. The driver can only be justified by the need to promptly deliver the victim to the hospital.

Is there a statute of limitations for leaving the scene of an accident?

The law is designed not only to protect violated human rights, but also establishes a time limit during which you can go to court to protect your rights and interests. The article will tell you in detail what the statute of limitations is and what to do if the culprit fled the scene of an accident.

What it is

Chapter 12 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in particular Art. 195 indicates that the statute of limitations should be understood as the period allotted by law for citizens to protect their violated rights.

The question immediately arises, why is it installed? In principle, the allotted period is considered a guarantee that within the allotted period the violated right of the citizen who filed a claim in court will be restored.

If the deadline is missed, it will be more difficult to restore the violated right, but if there are good reasons, this is possible.

The court does not consider the submitted application if the deadline is missed, if the case is reconsidered.

If a person has missed the statute of limitations, the court may refuse to accept the application, but only if, after checking all the information, it is determined that the period has indeed been missed.

There are two types of such deadlines established at the legislative level:

• general – the period of which is three years;
• special - is established depending on the subject of the dispute, it can be either less or more than three years.

What is the statute of limitations under Russian law for leaving the scene of an accident?

A traffic accident is an administrative offense that results in property damage to a vehicle, as well as physical and property damage to the victim.

These legal relations will be regulated by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which in this case establishes a limitation period of three years.

The limitation period is calculated either from the moment the incident occurred or from the moment when the injured person learned or could learn about his violated right.

However, it is worth paying attention to several features. Thus, for leaving the scene of an accident, the law provides for liability, which is expressed in deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle, as well as arrest for up to 15 days, if the actions of the perpetrator contain all the signs and elements of a crime.

The driver at fault for the accident is liable for leaving the scene of the accident if the person understood that he was leaving the scene of the accident and did so anyway, without intending to return to the scene of the accident. For this offense, the law provides a limitation period of three months. In this case, the person is deprived of the right to drive a vehicle.

If the driver of the accident is not found within three months, then the case will be closed. This means that after this period the injured party will not be able to restore the violated rights.

According to Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation for leaving the scene of an accident, the perpetrator bears administrative liability. Either one or both drivers can be held liable; it depends, first of all, on the degree of their guilt, as well as on the nature of the incident.

Leaving the scene of an accident is considered one of the gross violations of traffic rules.

Therefore, if the culprit realizes his guilt, you should not leave the scene of the accident, because:

• traffic police officers will carry out thorough work to find the culprit, so in this case it will not be possible to go unpunished;
• It is necessary to remain at the scene of the accident at least in order to give evidence and explain the essence, as well as give your assessment to the traffic police officer. So, after some time, it will be difficult to prove your innocence in court, because it will be impossible to determine the degree of guilt, as well as primary traces of damage, for the reason that the driver did not wait for the traffic police officers.

If there are no casualties in the accident, a traffic police officer at the scene of the incident issues a report and a certificate of the accident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGIOt9fJ4UI

Practice shows that in court, when considering a case of a traffic accident, it is quite difficult to prove that the driver who left the scene of the crime did not have the direct intention of leaving the scene of the accident.

The driver who left the scene of the accident in court tries to bring any evidence to justify himself, however, as a rule, it does not leave the desired results and the culprit is deprived of the right to drive a vehicle by a court decision.

So, if you think that the nature of the accident is insignificant, and none of the participants have any claims, then the court will still be on the side of the victim, which means that the person responsible for the accident will not have priority in this case, and most likely the court will make a decision not in favor of the latter.

In addition, it is quite difficult to prove one’s inattention, as a result of which the driver either did not hear or did not see the signal given by another road user. The culprit of the accident is brought to court, and payments for material damage must be compensated by the insurance company, which then has the right to recover the amount from the culprit of the accident.

It is worth paying attention to one more point. Thus, after a court decision is made regarding the guilt of the participants in an accident, the injured party has the right to recover material damage through civil proceedings, which means that in this case the statute of limitations applies.

Afterwards, if the actions of the participant in the accident show signs of a crime that fall under the qualifications of a crime under Art. 264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a person must bear criminal liability.

Further, after transferring the case of the incident to the investigative authorities, the investigator initiates a criminal case, which is then transferred to the court.

The court will make a decision after considering the case in the manner of claim proceedings.

Material damage is recovered by filing a civil claim.

If, for certain reasons, the victim was unable, after the decision in the case was made, to file a civil claim in court, then the law provides a period of three years for filing a claim in court.

In some cases, upon provision of documents confirming the valid reasons for not filing a claim, by a court decision, the period of the statement of claim may be extended, but not more than six months. The statute of limitations also applies to documents issued by traffic police officers.

If we analyze the norms of administrative legislation, we can draw the following conclusions:

• Art. 4.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establishes a period of 2 months for issuing a resolution in an administrative case, as well as 3 months for court decisions.
• a decision on an administrative offense must be made within a year from the moment of the accident in accordance with Art. 12.8, 12.24 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

This means that when considering a court case, different statutes of limitations apply to the participants in this process.

How to bring the culprit to justice if all deadlines have already passed

In accordance with Art. 27.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the court must consider the protocol on the administrative offense within 15 days. In addition, within three days from the moment of consideration of the accident case, the person accused of the accident is sent a summons on the basis of Art. 27.

2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, which must contain information regarding the date and time of the court hearing. After all parties to the case have been duly notified, a court hearing is scheduled.

Within 10 days from the date of the court’s decision on the case, the perpetrator has 10 days to appeal it in a higher court, however, in practice, cases arise when the participant in the accident did not receive a summons.

Sometimes it happens that a driver learns that he was found guilty of an accident by a court decision only after two years from the date of the accident.

If the limitation period was missed due to the fault of third parties, the court may restore the period for protecting the violated right. This period begins to be calculated from the moment the decision itself is made, and not from the moment it was received by the party in the case.

As for compensation for damage, the injured party has the right to file such a claim in court within three years. If this deadline is missed, the court will refuse to consider the civil claim.

Thus, each case has its own characteristics when it comes to calculating the limitation period.

Of course, it is not at all necessary to know them, but you just need to not forget about their existence, and, if necessary, use them to protect your violated rights.

If you understand that after the accident your rights were violated, do not put off filing a claim, because according to the law, inaction in protecting your rights is considered to be that you simply do not need to do so.

: Leaving the scene of an accident

Source: https://avtourist-DTP.ru/sushhestvuet-li-srok-davnosti-za-ostavl/