Contribution of the Injured Party to the Accident
What does it mean and how does it affect the amount of compensation?
Many injured parties who search for information about their compensation come across a word on the internet that causes concern: the injured party’s contribution to the accident. The insurance company informs the injured person that the benefit paid has been reduced “due to the injured party’s contribution”, while the injured person often does not know what this actually means or whether such a decision is lawful. In this article, we explain what the injured party’s contribution to the accident means, what its most common examples are — including riding a motorcycle above the speed limit, not wearing a helmet, not wearing protective clothing or riding a motorcycle without the required licence — and how this issue is assessed in court practice.
What is the injured party’s contribution to the accident?
The injured party’s contribution to the damage is regulated by Article 362 of the Polish Civil Code, according to which the obligation to compensate for damage is reduced accordingly if the injured party contributed to causing or increasing the damage, taking into account the circumstances and, in particular, the degree of fault of both parties.
“If the injured party contributed to causing or increasing the damage, the obligation to compensate for it shall be reduced accordingly, taking into account the circumstances and, in particular, the degree of fault of both parties.” — Article 362 of the Polish Civil Code
This means that if the injured party’s own conduct — whether an action or omission — contributed to the occurrence of the accident or caused its consequences (for example, the extent of the injuries) to be more serious, the court or insurance company may reduce the amount of compensation or damages for pain and suffering by a certain percentage. This does not mean that the injured party loses the right to compensation entirely, but rather that the compensation is reduced proportionally. In practice, the reduction is most often ten, twenty or thirty per cent, although in exceptional circumstances it may be even higher.
The full text of the provision can be verified in the Internet System of Legal Acts (ISAP) – Civil Code (Journal of Laws of 1964, No. 16, item 93).
The most common examples of the injured party’s contribution
An analysis of court cases and insurers’ decisions shows that certain situations occur particularly frequently, especially in accidents involving motorcyclists. The most commonly cited examples of contribution include:
1. Riding a motorcycle above the speed limit
Exceeding the speed limit while riding a motorcycle that is subsequently involved in an accident is one of the most frequently raised circumstances when determining contribution. Courts assess whether travelling at the correct, legally permitted speed would have given the motorcyclist a realistic opportunity to avoid the accident or significantly reduce its consequences. An expert opinion from a road accident reconstruction specialist is of key importance here, as the expert determines how the accident would have occurred if the motorcycle had been travelling at a speed compliant with the regulations.
2. Failure to wear a protective helmet
Riding without a helmet constitutes a breach of the obligation arising from the Polish Road Traffic Act and is often cited as a factor contributing to the severity of the damage, particularly in cases involving head injuries. It is one of the most frequently examined factors in claims for compensation by motorcyclists, although, as the courts emphasise, the mere absence of a helmet does not always establish contribution if the injuries were not related to the head.
3. Failure to wear protective clothing
Although the regulations do not impose an obligation on motorcyclists to wear specialised protective clothing to the same extent as the requirement to wear a helmet, courts sometimes examine whether the lack of such protection — including a motorcycle suit, jacket or protective footwear — contributed to the extent of injuries such as abrasions, fractures or friction burns.
4. Riding a motorcycle without the required licence
Driving a vehicle without the required licence (a category A driving licence) may be considered contribution if the court establishes a causal connection between the lack of experience or qualifications and the way in which the accident occurred. The mere absence of the required document, without establishing such a connection, does not automatically constitute grounds for reducing compensation.
5. Failure to wear a seat belt
Similarly to the issue of wearing a helmet, failure to wear a seat belt is a common basis for determining contribution in car accidents, particularly where the injuries would have been less severe had the seat belt been fastened. This applies both to drivers and passengers.
6. Driving under the influence of alcohol or other substances
This is one of the circumstances that courts assess most rigorously, both in terms of responsibility for causing the accident and in terms of the injured party’s contribution to its consequences.
7. Improper behaviour by a pedestrian
Examples include crossing the road in an unauthorised place, stepping onto the road unexpectedly or walking at night without reflective elements outside a built-up area.
How does the court assess the degree of contribution? – indicative overview
The table below is for illustrative purposes and summarises the factors that courts most commonly consider when assessing individual circumstances. It is not a fixed percentage schedule — each case is assessed individually.
Does contribution always mean an automatic reduction in compensation?
No. The mere occurrence of one of the circumstances listed above does not automatically mean that compensation will be reduced by a specific percentage. Determining whether there has been contribution and establishing its degree requires proof of:
the existence of a causal relationship between the injured party’s conduct and the damage (or its extent),
the degree of fault or improper conduct on the part of the injured party,
a comparison between the injured party’s conduct and the conduct that could reasonably have been expected of them in the circumstances.
In practice, insurers often apply predetermined, fixed percentages of contribution — for example, “no helmet = automatically 30%” — which may be challenged by the courts as an unjustified simplification. Contribution should be assessed individually, taking into account all the circumstances of the particular incident rather than predetermined tables used by insurance companies.
It is also important to know that, according to established case law, the mere fact that the injured party contributed to the damage does not automatically determine a specific percentage reduction. The decision in this respect is made by the court and must be justified in each individual case.
Current case law from common courts and the Supreme Court of Poland on this issue can be checked in publicly available databases: the Portal of Judgments of Common Courts and the Supreme Court – case law database.
Statistical data concerning road accidents, including the involvement of motorcyclists and the circumstances of accidents, are regularly published by the Police – Road Accident Statistics.
General information about the rights of consumers of financial and insurance services, including disputes concerning the amount of benefits, can be found on the website of the independent supervisory body, the Financial Ombudsman (Rzecznik Finansowy).
What to do if the insurer claims that you contributed to the accident?
If you have received a decision from an insurance company in which your compensation has been reduced due to your contribution to the accident, it is worth taking several steps:
Verify the basis on which the percentage of contribution was determined — check whether the insurer referred to specific evidence, such as an expert opinion or documentation from the accident scene, or whether it applied a fixed, predetermined percentage.
Check whether the conduct you are being blamed for actually contributed to causing or increasing the damage — not every breach of the regulations automatically constitutes contribution.
Do not automatically agree to the proposed percentage — the insurer’s decision is not final and may be challenged, including during court proceedings.
Consult a legal representative — an analysis of medical documentation, expert opinions concerning accident reconstruction and relevant case law makes it possible to realistically assess whether the percentage of contribution applied is justified or excessive.
The role of a professional legal representative is particularly important because assessing contribution often requires comparing medical documentation with an expert opinion on accident reconstruction and referring to the current case law of the courts in similar cases. Challenging an insurer’s decision independently, without professional support, can be difficult and often results in accepting an undervalued compensation amount.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does contribution mean that I will not receive any compensation?
No. Contribution results in a proportional reduction of the benefit rather than its complete exclusion, except in exceptional circumstances where the injured party’s fault is the sole cause of the accident.
Who decides the percentage of contribution?
At the claim settlement stage, the decision is made by the insurance company. However, this decision is not binding — the injured party may challenge it, and the final assessment is made by the court.
Does not wearing a helmet always mean that there is contribution?
Not always. A causal relationship must be established between the lack of a helmet and the extent of the injuries. If the injuries did not affect the head, this argument may not apply.
Summary
The injured party’s contribution to the accident is a legal mechanism intended to ensure a fair allocation of responsibility between the parties involved in an incident. However, it is not a tool that an insurer may apply automatically and without an individual assessment of the circumstances of the case. Circumstances such as riding a motorcycle at excessive speed, not wearing a helmet, not wearing protective clothing or riding without the required licence are frequently raised by insurance companies, but each case requires a separate and thorough assessment.
If your compensation has been reduced due to alleged contribution and you have doubts as to whether the insurer’s decision is lawful, Kancelaria Sagarto can help you analyse your case, assess whether the percentage of contribution applied is justified and, where appropriate, take steps to recover the full amount to which you are entitled.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice in an individual case. Each case involving the injured party’s contribution is assessed separately, based on the specific circumstances of the incident.
| Circumstance | What the court considers | Possible impact on compensation |
| Motorcyclist exceeding the speed limit | Whether travelling at the permitted speed would have made it possible to avoid the accident or reduce its consequences | Reduction of the benefit — the extent depends on the circumstances |
| Failure to wear a protective helmet | The relationship between the lack of a helmet and the type/extent of head injuries | Possible reduction, particularly in cases involving head injuries |
| Failure to wear protective clothing | Whether the lack of protective clothing affected the extent of the injuries (abrasions, fractures) | Assessed individually; no automatic reduction |
| Lack of required licence (category A driving licence) | The causal relationship between the lack of a licence and the circumstances of the accident | Depends on whether a real impact on the accident is established |
| Failure to wear a seat belt | Whether wearing a seat belt would have reduced the extent of the injuries | A common basis for reducing compensation |
| Driving under the influence of alcohol | The influence of intoxication on the course of the accident | Assessed very strictly by the courts |