Udmåling af erstatning ved personskade og tab af forsørger - Krim

1 Varying bases of liability
283
2 Differing principles and methods of loss computation and -
often not separable - assessment of damages
3 Differences with regard to the form of compensation and -
in the case of lump-sum awards - the methods used for capi-
talisation.
I do not wish to go into great detail with regard to the legal
bases of liability and the attempts to harmonise these at
least in Western European countries. As is generally known,
the Council of Europe, the Commission of the European Communi-
ties, the Rome Institute for the Standardisation of Private
Law, the Hague Conference on International Private Law, the
Comité Européen des Assurances (CEA) and other institutions -
in which the International Association for Insurance Law,
A.I.D.A., occupies an eminent position - have undertaken
strenuous efforts to harmonise the law, particularly in the
field of motor third party liability and products liability.
Even standardisation of liability regulations for travel agen-
cies, hoteliers, insurance brokers, and so forth is planned;
the Swedish Trafikförsäkring and patient insurance were dis-
cussed as possible models for new, standardised regulations in
various European countries.
We must not lose sight of the very substantial differences in
the bases of liability since the underlying regulations with
regard to the law of torts affect the standard of compensa-
tion. Wherever the wrongdoer is held strictly responsible
regardless of his negligence - the injured party's own negli-
gence being of no or only subordinate importance - almost all
accidentally injured persons receive adequate indemnity. How-
ever, if the liability depends on the proof of negligence, a
great deal of the accident victims receive nothing or only
inadequate compensation. Liability based on negligence still
prevails in English-speaking countries with the traditional
Common Law system.