Facts
On February 21, 2002, D. was hit by a tram and died from his injuries. On February 24, 2003, his ex-wife and daughters (A., B. and C.) filed an action for compensation for damages and moral harm before the Court of First Instance of the Canton of Geneva. The claim, totaling 284,503 francs, was directed jointly and severally against the Republic and Canton of Geneva (owner of the structure), the Transports Publics Genevois (TPG) and X. (the tram driver).
The Court dismissed the action, considering that the liability of the defendant parties was not engaged. On appeal by the plaintiffs, the Court of Justice of the Canton of Geneva found that the civil liability of the TPG was engaged, but held that the victim was also at fault, resulting in a 75% reduction of any potential compensation. It referred the case back to the Court of First Instance to rule on the damages in this sense.
The plaintiffs then filed a public law appeal and an appeal for reform with the Federal Tribunal, challenging the decision of the Court of Justice regarding the liability of X. and the 75% reduction of the compensation.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal examines the admissibility of the appeals submitted to it ex officio. It considers that the contested decision constitutes a partial judgment, insofar as it dismisses the action against the State of Geneva and X., but refers the case back to the Court of First Instance for instruction and a new judgment on the action against the TPG.
According to case law, a partial judgment is not considered a final decision within the meaning of Art. 48 para. 1 OJ. However, the Federal Tribunal admits the admissibility of the immediate appeal for reform, by analogy with Art. 50 OJ, when the extent of the evidentiary procedure depends to a significant extent on whether all the co-litigants or only some of them can be sued.
In…