Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 2369

An incident of negligent injury may occur as a result of two faults by two different persons. What this entails. Each commits an unlawful act distinct in its elements from the act committed by the other, constituting in itself an independent crime even if both lead to a single result. The implication: bringing criminal proceedings against the accused persons through a single indictment does not deprive either action of its independence from the other. Its effect. Termination of - 443 - Civil Procedure the criminal proceedings against one of them by issuance of a final judgment does not affect the continued hearing of the criminal proceedings against the other accused. The period barring the hearing of the civil action for the unlawful act committed by the first accused begins to run from the date of finality of that judgment. The basis thereof. - Two persons being charged with negligently causing injury to another. The court of first instance's conviction of one and acquittal of the other. The first's failure to appeal the judgment and its becoming final as to him. Its effect. Commencement of the period of a year for hearing the civil action arising from the act he committed after cessation of the suspensive effect. The Public Prosecution's challenge to the acquittal of the second accused. It has no effect, owing to the independence of the unlawful act of each from that of the other. This is not altered by supposing that the Misdemeanours Appeal Court reverses the judgment and convicts the second accused, resulting in his joint and several liability with the first accused. The reason: a jointly and severally liable debtor in respect of whom the period barring the hearing of the action has elapsed may invoke this against the creditor claiming the debt from him. The latter may not invoke against him the suspension of that period in respect of another debtor. The basis thereof: the presumed mutual agency between jointly and severally liable debtors operates in matters benefiting them, not in matters harming them, owing to the multiplicity of the ties between them and the creditor. Contravening this. An error in the application of the law requiring cassation of the judgment.