E-scooters, smoking weed, electricity theft
Court rulings from 2024 on Auto & Co
This audio version was artificially generated. More info | Send feedback
Accidents, driving bans and trouble with dealers or workshops: the Republic's courts are full of drivers and other road users fighting for their rights. Five examples from last year.
Stoner limit applies retroactively
The higher cannabis limits while driving can also apply retroactively. Drivers who were caught with drugs in their blood before August 22nd and whose case is still ongoing can insist on a more lenient sentence, according to a decision by the Oldenburg Higher Regional Court.
Because the most lenient legislation must always be applied in criminal and administrative offense law, the new limit values also apply to trips before the deadline, so-called old cases. A driver who was actually sentenced by a district court to a three-month driving ban and a fine of 1,000 euros benefited from this. Because the verdict was not yet final, he was now acquitted. As part of cannabis legalization, new blood limits for THC have been in effect since August 22nd. They increased from 1 nanogram per milliliter to 3.5 nanograms per milliliter. (Oldenburg Higher Regional Court, Ref.: 2 ORbs 95/24).
Charge electric cars with general electricity
Electricity theft is not a reason to terminate a rental agreement. At least not in the case of minor damage, as the Leverkusen district court decided. In the case under discussion, the driver of a car with a plug-in hybrid drive had charged his vehicle a total of ten times at the general socket of an apartment building. The landlord then issued an immediate and regular notice of termination. He refused to compensate for the damage by paying 600 euros.
The district judge accepted the dismissal without notice. The damage was minor at around 50 euros, and the tenant was willing to make compensation and there was no risk of a recurrence. The ordinary termination fails because the tenant's breach of duty is irrelevant, RA-Online quotes from the decision. (Leverkusen District Court, Ref.: 22 C 157/23)
If the e-scooter falls over
If a parked e-scooter damages a parked car when it falls over, neither the user nor the owner has to pay for the damage. This was decided by the Berlin-Mitte district court.
In the case under discussion, a car was damaged by an electric scooter from a rental company that fell over and had been legally parked on the sidewalk by the user three hours earlier. The car owner sued both the rental company and the user for damages. However, unsuccessfully. Because it is a small electric vehicle, neither the vehicle owner nor the driver's liability under the Road Traffic Act applies.
The court was also unable to identify a violation of the traffic safety obligation: the fact that an e-scooter falls over does not necessarily indicate improper parking, especially in large cities, according to the reasoning. Knocking over by third parties or the effects of the weather are also conceivable. In addition, the court points out that a general traffic safety requirement for e-scooters would make parking the vehicles in public spaces almost impossible. Even if it is parked against a house wall, damage to the facade cannot be ruled out. (Berlin-Mitte District Court, Ref.: 151 C 60/22 V)
No parking in shared parking spaces
Anyone who parks their own car in a car sharing parking lot must expect to be towed away. According to a ruling by the Düsseldorf Administrative Court, this applies even if there is no specific hindrance to other road users.
In the case under discussion, a driver sued against the towing fee charged by the city, arguing that she had only parked for 11 minutes while many other car sharing spaces were free. However, according to the court, this does not matter. From a legal perspective, a vehicle that is parked in a car sharing parking lot but is not participating in car sharing is absolutely not allowed to park. The towing measure is proportionate because the function of the parking spaces for car sharing vehicles can only be guaranteed if they are kept free of vehicles that are not authorized to park at all times, the portal “RA-Online” quotes from the reasoning. In addition, short parking also has a negative role model effect. (Administrative Court Düsseldorf, Ref.: 14 K 491/23)
Rental car prices must be complete
The price information on a rental car portal must be complete. According to the Frankfurt am Main regional court, if individual components are missing from the hit list and are only opened later, this is a violation of competition law.
In this specific case, a rental car portal had listed a total price on the hit list, but additional items for returning the vehicle with an empty tank, the one-way fee and the “young driver” fee were not included in the total and only appeared later in the booking process. A competition association sued for an injunction for this reason.
With success, as RA-Online reports: The other price components include the unavoidable and foreseeable components of the price that must be paid. It is irrelevant that the fees are displayed further down the line. By mentioning the total price on the hit list, which is too low, it is made more difficult for the consumer to make the right business decision. (Frankfurt am Main Regional Court, Ref.: 3-10 O 11/23)
