This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010CN0229
Case C-229/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Cível da Comarca do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 10 May 2010 — Maria Alice Pendão Lapa Costa Ferreira, Alexandra Pendão Lapa Ferreira v Companhia de Seguros Tranquilidade SA
Case C-229/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Cível da Comarca do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 10 May 2010 — Maria Alice Pendão Lapa Costa Ferreira, Alexandra Pendão Lapa Ferreira v Companhia de Seguros Tranquilidade SA
Case C-229/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Cível da Comarca do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 10 May 2010 — Maria Alice Pendão Lapa Costa Ferreira, Alexandra Pendão Lapa Ferreira v Companhia de Seguros Tranquilidade SA
OJ C 195, 17.7.2010, p. 12–13
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
17.7.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 195/12 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Cível da Comarca do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 10 May 2010 — Maria Alice Pendão Lapa Costa Ferreira, Alexandra Pendão Lapa Ferreira v Companhia de Seguros Tranquilidade SA
(Case C-229/10)
2010/C 195/17
Language of the case: Portuguese
Referring court
Tribunal Cível da Comarca do Porto
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Maria Alice Pendão Lapa Costa Ferreira, Alexandra Pendão Lapa Ferreira
Defendant: Companhia de Seguros Tranquilidade SA
Questions referred
|
1. |
Is the interpretation of Article 505 of the Código Civil (Portuguese Civil Code) which, in the case of an accident caused by the conduct of the pedestrian alone, excludes the liability for risk posed by the use of motor vehicles, compatible with the European directives [72/166/EEC, (1) 84/5/EEC, (2) 90/232/EEC, (3) 2000/26/EC, (4) and 2005/14/EC (5)] on compulsory motor vehicle insurance, and in particular with Article 1a of Directive 90/232/EEC? |
|
2. |
Is the interpretation of Article 570 of the Código Civil, whereby compensation may be reduced or excluded according to the degree of fault of both parties, when a wrongful act of the victim has contributed to or exacerbated the loss, compatible with those directives? |
|
3. |
And, if the answer is in the affirmative, do those directives preclude an interpretation which allows compensation to be limited or reduced, having regard to the fault of the pedestrian, on the one hand, and the risk posed by the motor vehicle, on the other, in the causation of the accident? |
(1) Council Directive 72/166/EEC of 24 April 1972 on the approximation of the laws of Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and to the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability (OJ, English Special Edition 1972 (II), p. 360).
(2) Second Council Directive 84/5/EEC of 30 December 1983 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (OJ 1984 L 8, p. 17).
(3) Third Council Directive 90/232/EEC of 14 May 1990 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (OJ 1990 L 129, p. 33).
(4) Directive 2000/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 May 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles and amending Council Directives 73/239/EEC and 88/357/EEC (Fourth motor insurance Directive) (OJ 2000 L 181, p. 65).
(5) Directive 2005/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 amending Council Directives 72/166/EEC, 84/5/EEC, 88/357/EEC and 90/232/EEC and Directive 2000/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 14).