Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 2638

An incident of negligent injury may occur as a result of two faults committed by two different persons. Necessary implication. Each must have committed an unlawful act distinct in its elements from the act committed by the other and constituting in itself an independent offence, even if both lead to a single result. Consequence: bringing criminal proceedings against the accused persons by a single charge sheet does not deprive either action of its independence from the other. Effect. Termination of the criminal action against one of them by a final judgment does not affect the continued hearing of the criminal action against the other accused. The period barring the hearing of the civil action concerning the unlawful act committed by the first accused begins to run from the date of finality of that judgment. Basis thereof. - Two persons charged with negligently causing injury to another. The court of first instance's conviction of one and acquittal of the other. The first person's failure to appeal the judgment and its becoming final in respect of him. Effect. Commencement of the period barring the hearing of the civil action arising from the act he committed after the suspensive effect ceases. The Public Prosecution's appeal against the acquittal of the second accused. No effect, owing to the independence of each person's unlawful act from the other's. This is not altered by assuming that the Misdemeanours Appeal Court reverses the judgment and convicts the second accused, resulting in his joint and several liability with the first accused. Rationale: a jointly and severally liable debtor in respect of whom the period barring the hearing of an action has expired. He 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. Basis thereof: the presumed reciprocal representation between jointly and severally liable debtors. It operates in what benefits them, not in what prejudices them, owing to the multiplicity of the relationships between them and the creditor. Contravention thereof. An error in the application of the law requiring cassation of the judgment.