Facts
On 10 October 1994, V. drove a truck belonging to his employer from Liestal towards Sissach and collided with a construction site delimitation device on the right side of the road. Following the impact, the vehicle crossed the carriageway and finally came to a stop against a noise barrier on the side of the road. Material damage amounting to a total of CHF 144,312.55 was caused to the truck, the delimitation device, the noise barrier, and a third-party vehicle. V. was convicted by a penal order dated 7 June 1995 for serious violation of road traffic regulations. The third-party liability insurer of the truck owner, insurer X., paid the damages with the exception of a deductible of CHF 1,000 and brought a recourse claim against V. for gross negligence in causing the accident. The latter raised the statute of limitations defence.Considerations
According to Art. 83(1) of the Road Traffic Act (RTA), the statute of limitations for claims for damages and compensation for moral injury resulting from accidents caused by motor vehicles or cycles that are the result of a punishable act does not occur before the statute of limitations for the criminal action. The Federal Supreme Court considers that this rule also applies to the recourse rights provided for in Art. 83(3) RTA. Indeed, the aim of a uniform regulation of the statute of limitations for the recourse rights provided for in the RTA was at the centre of the concerns when this provision was adopted. Although para. 3 does not contain an explicit reference to the criminal statute of limitations, it would be contrary to the objective of harmonisation pursued that the subrogated insurer be treated differently from the direct victim. Consequently,…