Principle 10:
The victim should have due access to a court or any other neutral entity, in order to receive an independent assessment of his/her rights according to applicable legislation.
Principle 10, the final principle of the Charter of Road Traffic Victims’ Rights, is also possibly its most straightforward. At its core, it simply seeks to ensure that victims get a fair hearing from an impartial source when making their claim.
An independent assessment by the judiciary is a central concept at the heart of practically every democracy. It should always be possible to submit a claim or dispute to an independent and impartial court. Such values are certainly rooted within all countries operating across the Green Card system and other countries where the rule of law applies.
In the case of a road traffic accident, this is simply about protecting the objectivity of the process. When a victim suffers damage they will firstly submit a claim. Once the claim has been made, the victim and the compensating party will then enter into negotiations to try to work out an appropriate settlement. Ideally, both parties will reach a fair and amicable agreement (in line with the other principles already set out in the Charter), meaning no additional parties need to be brought into the process.
However, as we know, the settlement of claims does not always follow such an ideal path. If both sides can’t find an agreement then there has to be a means of ensuring a fair and appropriate settlement is reached. Those are the circumstances where the courts generally become involved.
While courts or tribunals are usually where these matters are decided, there is also scope to consider alternative options. These might include an independent commission tasked with the assessment of personal injuries, an ombudsman, mediators, arbitrators and other dispute resolution mechanisms. As long as these other options can provide the certainty of impartiality and independence, they can offer a valuable means of resolving the claims process and any matters of dispute.
For that mark of fairness and impartiality to really apply, that also means the assessors must not be directly tied to one of the parties. So, for example, those adjudicating shouldn’t be directly funded by one of the sides involved. Such a scenario would completely undermine any air of independence.
Such balance is essential in ensuring the victim is not solely dependent on the willingness of the compensating party to provide them with the settlement they are due. Advancing claims through this independent party provides a greater guarantee to the victim that they will receive a fair sum of compensation at the end of the claim’s process and that those adjudicating are not biased. They may not get everything they want, but the victim should feel like the process itself was just.
Principle 10 of the Charter of Road Traffic Victims’ Rights basically says the referee should be neutral. It’s a simple idea that all those involved in claims have long come to value, which is why it is possibly the most universally embraced Charter principle of them all.
