Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 3618

Liability of the custodian of a thing. Its establishment on the basis of presumed fault in custody that does not admit proof to the contrary. The custodian’s proving that he committed no fault or that he exercised the requisite care and precaution to prevent damage from the thing. It does not exempt him from liability. The custodian must prove that the damage occurred due to an extraneous cause, namely force majeure, a fortuitous event, the injured party’s act or a third party’s act, for liability to be negated. - Establishment that the damage occurred as a result of the thing’s active intervention in causing it. The custodian of the thing may not avert liability from himself by denying fault, but rather by negating the causal link between the act of the thing and the damage. - Considering an accident a fortuitous event. Its condition. The impossibility of foreseeing it and the impossibility of preventing it. A car’s tyre is one of its components, and its bursting is foreseeable and not impossible to prevent. Its import. Its occurrence is not considered an extraneous cause breaking the causal link between the act and the damage. The custodian’s obligation to compensate for the damage resulting therefrom. Contravention of this. An error requiring partial cassation of the judgment.