Constitutional Court: clarifications on insurance disputes do not limit the right to compensation for damages

Теlegram CС - https://t.me/consot_kz

 

An application was submitted to the Constitutional Court to review Paragraph 19 of the Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court dated October 6, 2017 No. 8, concerning judicial practice in insurance disputes.

The application arose from the applicant’s disagreement with the decisions of the insurance company and the courts in a case involving compensation for damages following a road traffic accident. He argued that the Supreme Court’s clarification restricted his right to recover material damages.

The Constitutional Court noted that the contested provision, in itself, does not introduce any prohibitions or narrow the scope of rights. It merely explains how courts should apply the existing legislation. At the same time, the law expressly allows for the recovery of damages, including from the insured, if the insurance payout is insufficient.

The applicant’s arguments essentially amount to disagreement with the outcome of a specific dispute. He has already used the available remedies, including appeals to the insurance ombudsman and the courts, but has not demonstrated how the provision itself violates his constitutional rights.

The Constitutional Court emphasized that the review of decisions of insurance companies and judicial acts does not fall within its jurisdiction.