In determining the costs associated with the funeral, the court concluded that it was necessary to recover the costs associated with the memorial dinner, incurred only on the day of the funeral.
U.I., which also acts in the interests of minor children, requested to recover material damage caused by a criminal offense.
The claim is motivated by the fact that V.V. was found guilty by the verdict of the court under part 3 of Article 345 of the Criminal Code.
The material damage was determined by the plaintiff in the amount of unpaid contributions to the Bank necessary for the purchase of rental housing in the amount of 3,355,420 tenge, as well as funeral expenses in the amount of 1,625,000 tenge.
By the decision of the Temirtau City Court of the Karaganda region dated August 5, 2022, the claim was partially satisfied: V.V.'s expenses related to the manufacture of the monument in the amount of 118,700 tenge were recovered in favor of U.I., the rest of the claims were denied.
By the decision of the appeals board dated November 23, 2022, the court's decision was changed, the costs collected from V.V. in favor of U.I. were increased from 118,700 tenge to 718,700 tenge.
When determining funeral expenses, the board assumed that these were expenses related to the performance of ritual actions for the burial of a spouse by the plaintiff in accordance with customs and traditions.
Paragraph 12 of the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 9, 1999 No. 9 "On certain issues of application by the courts of the Republic of legislation on compensation for damage caused to health" explains what should be attributed to funeral expenses.
When resolving these issues, one should proceed from the customs and traditions of the area, as well as the average cost of the disputed funeral services.
It should be noted that expenses related to the memorial dinner are reimbursed only on the day of the funeral in the amount actually incurred. The plaintiff requested to recover the costs of purchasing 2 heads of horses worth 600,000 tenge each, the court of first instance refused to satisfy the claim in this part, citing the lack of a document confirming these costs.
The Judicial Board concluded that it was necessary to recover the costs associated with the memorial dinner only on the day of the funeral in the form of the cost of one horse, taking into account the evidence recognized as admissible in the case.
Jurisdiction of cases
The jurisdiction of cases is determined in accordance with the general rules established by Article 29 of the CPC, that is, at the place of residence of the defendant of an individual or at the location of the defendant of a legal entity.
Along with this, claims for compensation for damage caused by injury or other damage to health, as well as caused by the death of the breadwinner, may be filed by the plaintiff at his place of residence or at the place of injury (part 5 of Article 30 of the CPC).
State duty
According to paragraph 1 of Article 610 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Taxes and Other Mandatory Payments to the Budget" (Tax Code), a state fee is charged in the following amounts from claims for material damage filed in court: for individuals - 1 percent of the amount of the claim, but not more than 10,000 MCI, for legal entities - 3 a percentage of the claim amount, but not more than 20,000 MCI, from non-property claims - 0.5 MCI.
Plaintiffs in claims for compensation for damage caused by injury or other damage to health, as well as the death of the breadwinner, are exempt from paying state duty on the basis of subparagraph 5) of Article 616 of the Tax Code.
The legislation does not provide for pre-trial settlement
Courts should keep in mind that the legislation does not provide for the plaintiff's compliance with the procedure for pre-trial settlement of disputes on compensation for damage caused by a source of increased danger (hereinafter referred to as IPO).
Example: By the ruling of the Alatau District Court of Almaty dated April 5, 2023, the claim of N.D. to K.K. and Zh.E. for recovery of material damage caused by IPO in connection with non-compliance with the procedure for pre-trial settlement of the dispute was dismissed.
In accordance with subparagraph 1) of Article 279 of the CPC RK, the court leaves the claim without consideration if the plaintiff has not complied with the procedure established by law for this category of cases or the procedure provided for in the contract for pre-trial dispute settlement and the possibility of applying this procedure has not been lost.
If the law establishes or the contract provides for a pre-trial dispute settlement procedure for a certain category of cases, an appeal to the court may be after observing this procedure (part 6 of Article 8 of the CPC RK).
Taking into account these norms, by the ruling of the judicial board for Civil Cases of the Almaty City Court dated May 18, 2023, the ruling of the court of first instance was canceled, with the transfer of the case to the court of first instance for consideration on the merits.
The plaintiffs are citizens and legal entities.
In accordance with Part 1 of Article 47 of the CPC RK, plaintiffs are citizens and legal entities who have filed a claim in defense of their violated or disputed rights and freedoms, legitimate interests, or in whose defense a claim has been filed by other persons in accordance with the procedure provided for by this Code.
Determination of the defendant in a claim for damages
When determining the defendant in a claim for damages, it is necessary to check the legal grounds for the defendant's ownership of IPO property.
M.E. filed a lawsuit against B.E., K. for recovery of material damage and monetary compensation for moral damage caused as a result of the accident.
By the decision of the Borodulikhinsky district Court of the Abai region dated January 12, 2023, the claim was partially satisfied, material damage in the amount of 852,459 tenge was recovered from B.E. in favor of M.E., monetary compensation for moral damage in the amount of 1,200,000 tenge.
The court found that the Lada 21713 car belongs to the defendant K.A., the defendant B.E. drove the vehicle on the basis of an insurance policy.
By the verdict of the court No. 2 of the city of Semey, East Kazakhstan region, dated December 21, 2021, B.E. was found guilty of committing a criminal offense under part 2 of Article 345 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which established that B.E., driving a Lada 21713 motor vehicle, made a head-on collision with a Toyota Avensis motor vehicle.
As a result of the accident, M.E. suffered serious harm to her health.
Based on paragraph 1 of Article 931 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, B.E., who was legally driving the vehicle, was reasonably recognized as the owner of the Lada 21713 vehicle at the time of the accident.
The presence of an insurance policy indicates the insurance of the defendant's GPO as the owner of the vehicle.
Regulatory framework
The normative legal acts regulating these legal relations and subject to application in the consideration of cases of the analyzed category are:
- The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
- The Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code);
- The Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter - CPC);
- The Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Administrative Offenses" (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Code);
- The Labor Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Labor Code),
- The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners";
- The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On compulsory insurance of civil liability of the carrier to passengers";
- The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Road Traffic" dated April 17, 2014;
- Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 6, 2017 No. 8 "On Judicial practice in disputes arising from insurance contracts";
- Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 27, 2015 No. 7 "On the application by courts of legislation on compensation for moral damage";
- Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 9, 1999 No. 9 "On certain issues of application by courts of the Republic of legislation on compensation for damage caused to health";
- Rules for determining the amount of damage caused to a vehicle, approved by Resolution No. 14 of the Board of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 28, 2016;
- Order of the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 30, 2023 No. 534 "On approval of the Rules of the Road, the Basic provisions for the admission of vehicles to operation, the list of operational and special services, the transport of which is subject to equipment with special light and sound signals and coloring according to special color schemes";
- Standard Rules for keeping and walking pets, approved by Order No. 168 of the Minister of Ecology, Geology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 20, 2022; - Standard Rules for grazing farm Animals, approved by Order No. 145 of the Minister of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 29, 2020.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
