SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE REPUBLIC
CRIMINAL PERMANENT
– 1 –
ANTHO
APPEALS on points of law N. º 1000-2021/LAMBAYEQUE
SPEAKER: CESAR SAN MARTIN CASTRO
Title: civil Redress. Well risky. Strict liability. Items
Sumilla. 1. To stem the appeal of the complainant by the object's civil
process, only corresponds to scrutinize whether the facts have been correctly
established –if not, there is a serious vitium in iudicando in factum– and if the rules of
material rights are interpreted and applied correctly (vitium in iudicando
in iuris). 2. The grievant had no SOAT or license to drive smaller vehicles.
The tractor driven by the accused was not brake system front
suitable for driving on the paved road, I just had the rear brakes that
they worked exclusively for agricultural work. It is of note that the
author of the Technical Report Police was discussed in the plenary session and gave an account of the
area of impact and the tractor struck the motorcycle –is a test
expert, in which the expert report consists in cars and its author was examined in the
plenary–. Then, it is erroneous to hold that the expert evidence in mention can't
be used. The petty PNP Lion Cachay is not a witness, an expert, and, as such,
prepared the technical report, and explained it in the act of speaking. It joins the merit of the
act of intervention and the declaration of its author, the petty PNP Valverde Rafael.
3. The article 1970 the Civil Code. It is the driving
a well risky, as it is a tractor, and as a result of the traffic accident
produced caused a damage to the aggrieved. The article 1972 of the Civil Code excludes,
in these cases, the civil liability when the damage was the result, among
others, of the recklessness of those who suffer the damage. In such a case, what should
be tested is that the grievant acted exclusively with recklessness, of which he was
completely oblivious to the defendant. 4. It is true that the aggrieved lacked license
driving –and the motorcycle he was riding was not SOAT– what matters a
contributory factor to the event harmful, and must be taken into consideration for the
determination of the amount of the civil redress. However, in the particular damage to your
person brokered another factor, determinant in this case, on the part of the driver of the
tractor, the accused CARLOS SANTAMARIA CASTLE, in so far as it was he who
it collided with the motorcycle when not to notice his presence in the place of the facts. No
it is proved, therefore, that, in fact, sub-field mediated a recklessness exclusive
wronged.
–JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF CASSATION–
Lima, twenty-fourth day of July, two thousand twenty-four
SEEN; in a public hearing: appeal, by
the grounds of non-observance of the precept of the proceedings, violation of the precept material,
filed by the defense of the actor civil, ANTONY SMITH BACA HORNA,
against the judgment of view at two hundred and four, seven December
two thousand twenty, confirming at one end and repealing another
judgment of the first instance of page hundred and twenty-five, twelve of march
two thousand and nineteen, acquitted Carlos Santamaría Castle of the indictment
prosecutor made against them for the crime of injury to a negligent act serious in your
tort and dismissed the payment of civil redress in his favour; with everything
other than the matter it contains.
APPEALS on points of law N. º 1000-2021/LAMBAYEQUE
– 2 –
The speaker has been the mr. SAN MARTIN CASTRO.
FUNDAMENTALS OF FACT
FIRST. That, according to the indictment attorney at a hundred and fifteen, sixteen
of July, two thousand nineteen, the facts that are the subject of the process are as
continue to:
A. The twenty-fourth day of October, two thousand and fifteen, as the fourteen hours, the
indicted CARLOS SANTAMARIA CASTLE was driving the tractor with series
PY540L003097, company-owned Hacienda El Potrero
Closed joint-stock company Avenue Pakumuros, while the
actor civil Antony Smith Baca Horna driving in the same way your
motorcycle without plate of filming. When you reach the intersection with the street
extension Manco Capac the aggrieved Baca Horna slowed to obey
traffic lights, but he was hit in the back of the
motorcycle tractor that I drove the accused SANTAMARIA
CASTLE, which continued its march, and dragged him to the said injured several
meters and stopped by the reaction force exerted by the body of
the motorcycle and the wheels of the tractor, leaving traces of drag
metal. The tractor had no system of front brake fit
to travel on the paved road, I just had the rear brakes that
they worked exclusively for agricultural work.
B. As a consequence of the facts, the aggrieved Baca Horna turned out
injured, and by the severity of the injuries, was taken to the Hospital
General of Jaén and, subsequently, to Chiclayo. The medical certificate
legal 000344-PH-HC concluded: 1. The aggrieved Baca Horna presented
injuries contusas kinds of traumatic for event traffic according to history
clinical. 2. Presented clinical and radiographic signs of fracture level
vertebral L1, according to clinical history. 3. Presented clinical signs of
surgical intervention for conclusion one and two. 4. It required forty and
five days of care facultative and one hundred and twenty days of disability
medico-legal.
C. The Inspection Technician Police determined that the defendant SANTAMARIA
CASTLE violated National Regulations in Transit: articles 90, 91,
92, 93, 95, 107, 146, 155, 160, 161, 227, 271, and 272. The factor
determinant of the event was the recklessness of the defendant to not be aware of
the change of traffic light, impacting the motorcycle
he drove the aggrieved, his lack of skill by not having certificate
operator of heavy machinery, issued by the technical school of operators
of machinery, the speed with which he drove his machinery and the
tractor, property of the third civil responsible, was not in
appropriate conditions for operating in a road traffic asphalt and
it lacked the brake system.

APPEALS on points of law N. º 1000-2021/LAMBAYEQUE
– 3 –
SECOND. The procedure was developed as follows
then:
1. The lord provincial Prosecutor of the First Fiscalía provincial Penal
Corporate Jaén made charges against CARLOS SANTAMARIA
CASTLE for the crime of injury to a negligent act serious, referred to in article
124, fourth paragraph, of the Penal Code, in tort Antony Smith Baca
Horna.
2. Conducted the hearing of control of accusation at twenty-four,
issued the writ of trial, issued the summons to judgment of pages
forty-six, fourteen of February, two thousand nineteen, the First
Criminal court one-man Jaén, pre-trial oral, public, and
contradictory, issued a ruling of first instance of absolution of pages
one hundred twenty-five, twelve of march, two thousand nineteen. Their
considerations are:
A. Not tested the violation of traffic rules by the defendant
SANTAMARIA CASTLE, because it is not established that he crossed the red light
the traffic light or that it does not have the capacity to operate the tractor.
B. If it is proved the existence of a set of traffic lights at the intersections of
the avenue Pakamuros and extension Manco Capac city
Jaén, the place where the accident occurred, there is no evidence that
stating that the defendant crossed the street when the vehicle has been
found in red.
C. as the lack of training to drive the tractor by
of the defendant, nor was tested in such a circumstance, because it does not exist or
a minimum of corroboration peripheral on the lack of skill that you
attributed, reflected in the lack of technical knowledge to operate the
tractor.
D. with Respect to the civil remedies, the article 12, paragraph 3 of the CPP
he points out that the acquittal does not prevent the body
court to rule on the civil action arising from the fact
punishable. Article 93 of the CP stipulates that the civil remedies
understand the restitution of the property or, if this is not possible the payment of the value
and the compensation for the damages caused. Thus,
it should be borne in mind that, without prejudice to what is given in
relationship to the object of criminal, it is for the judge to decide if you have the
criteria of imputation own illegal behavior that resulted in
a damage subject to compensation in accordance with article 1969 of the Civil Code.
E. So, not having been given the responsibility of the defendant that
have a direct impact on the issuance of an acquittal, it is not
't matter the denial of any damage caused to the victim, in both and in
how much will it hurt your health, as has been duly
tested in this trial.
F. Being so, and as prescribed in article 1970 Code
Civil set an amount of compensation in favour of the
APPEALS on points of law N. º 1000-2021/LAMBAYEQUE