Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant ([A.] ): Injured pedestrian, represented by attorney Roger Zenari.
  • Appellee 1 ([B.] ): Tram driver, represented by attorney Andreas Wehrle.
  • Appellee 2: Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Solothurn.

Facts:

  • On March 17, 2018, the appellant collided with a tram driven by appellee 1 in Solothurn.
  • The appellant suffered severe injuries and became 100% incapacitated for work.
  • The President of the District Court of Solothurn-Lebern convicted appellee 1 of negligent serious bodily harm and held him 100% liable.
  • The Higher Court of the Canton of Solothurn reduced the liability quota to 2/3 and cut the party compensation.
  • The appellant requested the restoration of the original liability quota and the unreduced party compensation.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court reviews appeals against decisions in criminal cases, including civil claims that are dealt with together with the criminal case (Art. 78 para. 1 and para. 2 lit. a FSCA). The appeal in criminal cases is admissible, as the primary issue before the lower court was the criminal matter and, consequently, the civil claim. The private plaintiff is entitled to appeal under Art. 81 para. 1 lit. b no. 5 FSCA if the challenged decision affects the assessment of their civil claims.

Under Art. 41 para. 1 CO, anyone who unlawfully causes damage to another is liable for compensation. Art. 44 para. 1 CO provides that the liability for compensation may be reduced CO waived if the injured party has contributed to the damage. The fault of the injured party is assessed according to the same rules as the fault of the tortfeasor. The Federal Supreme Court only reviews discretionary decisions of the lower court if they deviate without reason from recognized principles CO prove to be obviously unfair.

The lower court found that the appellant disregarded the tram's right of way and was inattentive. Appellee 1 did not reduce speed despite the appellant's…