Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 112

Liability of the custodian of a thing. It rests on presumed fault in custody that cannot be rebutted. The custodian’s proof that he committed no fault or exercised the requisite care and precaution so that the thing would not cause damage. It does not exempt him from liability. The custodian must prove that the damage occurred due to an external cause consisting of force majeure, a fortuitous event, an act of the injured person or an act of a third party 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 avoid liability by denying fault, but by negating the causal link between the act of the thing and the damage. - Considering an accident a fortuitous event. Its condition. It must be unforeseeable and impossible to avert. A vehicle’s tyre is one of its components, and its bursting is foreseeable and not impossible to avert. Its implication. Its occurrence is not considered an external cause severing the causal link between the act and the damage. The custodian’s obligation to compensate for the resulting damage. Contravention thereof. An error requiring partial cassation of the judgment. Compensation based on the theory of acts of the sovereign: