The Appellate Circuit of the Investment and Commerce Court upheld a lower court ruling ordering a passenger transport company, one of its drivers, and the vehicle’s insurer to jointly pay QR500,000 in compensation to a passenger who sustained serious injuries in a traffic accident while travelling in a company vehicle.
According to court documents, the claimant filed a lawsuit through his legal representative, seeking QR3mn in material and moral damages from the transport company, the driver, and the insurance company. The lawsuit indicated that the claimant was visiting Qatar when he was involved in a road accident in May 2024, while riding in a vehicle operated by the passenger transport company.
The accident was attributed to the driver’s negligence, resulting in severe injuries. Accordingly, the claimant suffered multiple injuries, including spinal fractures, a partial amputation of a finger on his left hand, and partial hearing loss caused by a ruptured eardrum. He also incurred substantial medical expenses both inside and outside Qatar and claimed loss of additional income due to his inability to work during his recovery period.
The court noted that a final criminal judgment had previously convicted the driver responsible for the accident. As the ruling was not appealed, the driver’s liability was established, along with the joint responsibility of the transport company and the insurer for compensating the victim’s material and moral damages.
In support of the claim, the plaintiff’s legal representative submitted documentary evidence, including the accident report and vehicle-related records. The Court of First Instance ultimately ruled that the transport company, its driver, and the insurer were jointly liable and ordered them to pay QR500,000 in compensation for the damages suffered by the claimant.
Eventually, the defendants appealed the judgment. However, the Court of Appeal accepted the appeal on procedural grounds but rejected it on the merits, affirming the lower court’s decision in full.
The appellate court reasoned that the first-instance judgment was legally sound and consistent with applicable law. It found that the lower court had thoroughly examined the facts and evidence of the case and had provided sufficient and well-founded legal reasoning.
The court further held that the appellants failed to present any arguments or evidence capable of undermining the judgment's validity or the legal and factual grounds on which it was based. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the compensation award was upheld.