Application of signs of the dimensions of the passage under the technological overpass. What does the prohibitory road sign “Height limit. Appointment of a road "assistant"

The base of the road sign is made of galvanized steel with a thickness of 0.8-1mm, to increase the rigidity characteristics, the workpiece is rolled to obtain a double flanging. A road sign mask made of high-quality reflective films in accordance with GOST R 52290-2004 and GOST 32945-2014 is applied to the surface of the base. Additional stiffeners and reinforced fasteners eliminate the likelihood of the sign bending both from wind load and under the influence of any forces. To secure the road sign, the base is equipped with a special fastening such as a tongue.

It is prohibited to enter any vehicle, the dimensions of which (with or without cargo) exceed the established figure in height. Road sign 3.13 is installed in cases where the distance from the surface of the road surface to the bottom of the superstructure of an artificial structure, utilities, etc. less than 5 m. A repeated sign is allowed to be installed on the span of an artificial structure, and if there is a clearance gate in front of it, on the gate.

Road signs 1.8, 1.15, 1.16, 1.18-1.21, 1.33, 2.6, 3.11-3.16, 3.18.1-3.25, made on a yellow background, are used in places where road works. In this case, signs 1.8, 1.15, 1.16, 1.18-1.21, 1.33, 2.6, 3.11-3.16, 3.18.1-3.25, made on a white background, are covered with covers or dismantled

Table E.4

Pickup:

Pickup from the warehouse at the address: Moscow, st. Shosseynaya, 90, building 5

Working hours: Mon-Fri, 10:00 - 18:00

For legal entities, upon receipt of the goods, you must have a power of attorney or seal with you. For individuals - a passport.

Delivery in Moscow and Moscow region *:

Delivery in Moscow within the Moscow Ring Road - 1000 ** rubles.
Delivery up to 10 km outside the Moscow Ring Road - RUB 1500 **.
Delivery from 10 to 20 km outside the Moscow Ring Road - 2000 ** rubles.
Delivery from 20 to 30 km outside the Moscow Ring Road - 2500 ** rubles.

Delivery is carried out daily, except weekends and holidays from 10:00 to 18:00.

* Delivery of orders is made to the entrance or to the nearest possible parking place, the rise to the floor is carried out by the customer.
** The price is indicated for the delivery of an order with a total weight of no more than 1000 kg, a length of no more than 4 meters.

Delivery across Russia:

Delivery in Russia is carried out by transport companies.

Delivery to the terminals of TC "PEK", TC "GlavDostavka", "DK Transit" (IP Litovchenko) in Moscow - free of charge. To the terminals of other transport companies (except for TC Business lines) according to the delivery price list in Moscow and the Moscow region.

The sign is used to prohibit the movement of vehicles, the overall height of which (with or without cargo) is greater than that indicated on the sign. The sign is installed in cases where the distance from the surface of the road surface to the bottom of the superstructure of an artificial structure, engineering communications, etc. less than 5 m.

The height indicated on the sign should be less than the actual one by 0.2-0.4 m for engineering communications, by 0.3 and 0.4 m - for overpasses, along which the motor and railways pass, respectively. The difference between the actual and indicated heights may be increased depending on the evenness of the road surface. A repeated sign 3.13 is allowed to be installed on the span of an artificial structure, and if there is a clearance gate in front of it, on the gate.

The signs are made of galvanized metal 0.8-1 mm thick, with double flanging, which gives additional rigidity to the sign body. Each sign has two tongue-shaped attachment points. The fastening elements are attached to the body by the bulging method, which does not distort the image of the sign and provides much higher reliability than spot welding or riveting.

Currently, there is a height restriction on roads in the country. According to GOST, when using road devices, in particular, those of a cargo nature, dimensions must be taken into account, through which safe movement on highways is carried out. The geometry in the traffic rules is formulated in accordance with the agreements concluded by Russia, which are of an international nature. In addition to our country, it includes the states that are members of the CIS. Width and other height restrictions are indicated in the specified act. The paragraph has the wording 6.3. Mathematics indicates that the EAC has a height limit of four meters. In China, the vehicle limit would be 4.3 meters.

The height restriction sign is prohibitive. There are separate provisions in the legislation regarding it. In particular, the legislator reflects the rules according to which the installation of the said sign is made. This is done in order to ensure safety for the inhabitants of the country.

Places of such an installation are:

sections of the route where gas pipelines are located;
location of the overpass;
bridges.

This also includes other structures that provide that cars pass under them. The height limitation sign is also placed in those areas where the tunnels are located. Any route should be based on what is shown on the map. According to the rules, the use of these structures is allowed in the case when the car has a lower height than that provided for by the building.

These provisions do not affect travel by metro. In some situations, the gate also has an indication of the sign in question. Carrying goods by transport is also required in accordance with the established regulations. The height sign indicates the presence of the maximum size that the car can have. Vehicle drivers must take these provisions into account. The height will be named in meters. In this case, the motorist takes into account not only the car itself, but also the cargo that is transported by him.

The general level - those who on their way do not comply with the established rules regarding the height of the car and cargo - will not be able to negatively affect. In this situation, penalties are applied to violators. These provisions are enshrined in legislation. In addition, it should be borne in mind that the production of these actions during movement indicates a violation of the structure, under which the car is passing. Also, the health of pedestrians and other motorists is caused.

The main violation may be that the fence collapses and falls on a person, as well as damage is caused to devices that supply light, systems through which video surveillance and other important objects are made. In fact, the person driving the vehicle at the moment is violating the rules enshrined in the legislation. These provisions apply to all motorists moving around the country.

If there is a traffic violation, the driver will not be able to avoid punishment. Moving around objects where signs with restrictions are installed - he violates the rules regarding moving along them. Installation is carried out in accordance with the specified provisions of the law. You won't be able to buy protection from punishment. Measures of responsibility of an administrative nature are assigned. In addition, those provisions reflected in the civil law may also apply. An important line - the consequences of the violation must be taken into account.

The sign regarding the height limitation has the form of a prohibition, it is installed on the ground. It should be noted that the installation work on the installation of this sign is carried out before the zone of action of the sign in question begins. The placement of the height vector, as an example, can be fixed as 3.5 meters. It depends on what maximum size is provided by the design as possible. Height should be taken into account, affecting the distance from a pedestrian crossing or other section on the floor of the road to the edge of the structure. The bottom edge is taken into account. The location of the sea does not matter in this case.

According to the fixed GOST, a small spare distance is established with respect to the value in question. The photo of the symbols in this situation does not apply to the legislative provisions. However, lawmakers reflect that for structures such as overpasses and bridges, the height will be about twenty cm less, while for various kinds of overpasses, this distance becomes less than about 40 cm.The specified centimeters are subtracted from the height that is allowed by law. Provisions are envisaged according to which, at a given distance, evacuation or fire routes can be laid in the future.

The designation of the indicated sign applies only to freight transport.

In particular, it is indicated:

The sign to some extent repeats the legislative provisions. They affect the vertical layout rules.
Such markings are applied to structures that have a lateral or upper character.

To make the sign noticeable in the dark, it will be depicted using paint with reflection properties. Evacuation, even from a familiar object, is carried out according to detour signs. In garages, in some situations, a height limitation is also provided. Flying in aircraft can also touch the greaseable positions, indicating that it is not possible to lower the aircraft to a certain level.

The construction of the buildings under consideration is being carried out at the level prescribed by the law. If the sign is applied to a yellow background, this indicates that it is temporary. When there are discrepancies between permanent signs and temporary ones, you need to follow the information reflected on the latter.

Responsibility

Privately, you can download traffic rules and periodically repeat this, especially for novice drivers. The legislator stipulates that such provisions should be taken into account by all motorists. The consequences of non-compliance with the prescribed rules are various factors. In particular, when a person decides, contrary to physics, to drive under the buildings in front of which the act in question is installed, the consequence will be a disaster. Spikes can snag on a structure.

When a truck tries to drive under these buildings, its structure is violated. The damage is mechanical. In this case, these provisions apply to both transport and engineering buildings. In this case, the driver endangers his own health and life, and also threatens others with his actions. At the same time, those who are not guilty of anything suffer.

There are situations when a motorist drives through the building at his own risk and does not cause damage to the car or structure - in fact, there is a violation of administrative norms.

In this case, the offender may be subject to:

penalties;
they are expressed in the amount of 500 rubles.

It is recommended to show considerable attention in these situations. This applies to the entire time the vehicle is being driven. In this case, this allows you not to lose sight of all the warnings that are located along the route. If the motorist pays attention to all the signs, this helps him to reach the destination as quickly as possible. Such provisions are associated with the absence of the need to return to a certain point on the route in order to take a detour. Bypass signs are installed next to the indicated ones. In case of damage to goods, the offender will bear material and other responsibility. The sign of limitation on a certain height is important among traffic rules.

Resolution of the Seventeenth Arbitration Court of Appeal of 11.02.2008 n 17AP-255/2008-GK in case n A71-234 / 2007 The absence of road signs indicating height restrictions on the plaintiff's inner territory is not a reason for reducing the amount of damage caused to the plaintiff by the defendant's driver. This conclusion is based on the fact that the driver is obliged to find out whether the height of his load allows to pass under the overpass. Court of First Instance Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic

SEVENTEENTH ARBITRAL APPEAL COURT
RESOLUTION
of February 11, 2008 N 17AP-255/2008-GK
Case N А71-234 / 2007
(extract)
The operative part of the resolution was announced on February 4, 2008.
The full resolution was issued on February 11, 2008.
Seventeenth Arbitration Court of Appeal
with the participation:
from the plaintiff, consumer society "O": failed to appear, duly notified on 21.01.2008;
from the defendant, limited liability company "C": did not appear, was duly notified on January 22, 2008;
from 3 persons: 1) P .: did not appear, a request was received to consider the complaint in his absence;
2) Closed Joint Stock Company "M": failed to appear, duly notified on January 21, 2008;
Having considered in a court session the appeal of the defendant, a limited liability company "C",
on the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic
of November 26, 2007
in case N А71-234 / 2007,
on the claim of the consumer society "O"
to the limited liability company "C",
third parties who do not file independent claims, P. and Closed Joint Stock Company "M";
on recovery of damage,
installed:
consumer society "O" (hereinafter - PO "O") applied to the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic to the limited liability company "S" (hereinafter - LLC "S") with a claim for recovery of damage resulting from harm, in the amount of 315,246 RUB, the cost of paying the appraisal company in the amount of 2,400 rubles, and the cost of paying the state fee in the amount of 7,852 rubles. 92 kopecks (vol. 1, l.d. 4).
By the definition of the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic dated 03.10.2007, P. was brought to participate in the case as a third party who does not declare independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute (v. 1, l.d. 155).
By the definition of the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic dated 23.10.2007, the closed joint-stock company "M" (v. 2, case file 26) was brought in as a third party that does not file independent claims.
By the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic of November 26, 2007 (operative part of November 20, 2007), the claims were partially satisfied, from LLC "S" in favor of PO "O" 308,910 rubles were collected. damage, 2,400 rubles. the cost of assessing the damaged property, as well as 7 696 RUB. 27 kopecks. expenses for the state fee, the rest of the claim was denied (v. 2, l.d. 51-54).
The defendant, LLC "S", with the court decision of 26.11.2007 (operative part of 20.11.2007) disagrees on the grounds set out in the appeal, asks to cancel the decision, to reject the claim. Believes that the court did not correctly apply the norms of substantive law, Article 1083 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation was not applied. The complainant holds that the traffic accident on 06.06.2006 occurred as a result of gross negligence of the plaintiff due to the absence of a warning sign "Height restriction" on the overpass and the pipeline.
The complaint was considered in the absence of persons participating in the case, in accordance with Article 156 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.
The legality and validity of the appealed decision was verified by the arbitration court of the appellate instance in the manner prescribed by Articles 266 and 268 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.
As follows from the case materials, 06.06.2006, on the street. Mayakovsky, 18 in the city of Izhevsk on the territory of PO "O" there was a road traffic accident, as a result of which the car KAMAZ 54112, state. number С986КА / 18, owned by LLC "S" on the right of ownership, under the control of an employee of LLC "S" P., hit the overpass, heating main.
As a result of the accident, the overpass received mechanical damage, and the owner (PO "O") suffered material damage, consisting of the cost of repair and construction work on the heating main and the steel overpass and the cost of assessing the damaged property.
The ownership of the territory of the base on which the road accident occurred, as well as the damaged heating main of PO "O", is confirmed by the documents in the case file (certificate of the Union of Consumer Societies of the Udmurt Republic dated 22.02.2007 (v. 1, p. 75) , the act of establishing (restoring, determining the location of the established) boundaries of the land plot dated 09/27/2002 (vol. 1, p. 100), by the Resolution of the Izhevsk administration "On the provision of land plots for rent to the consumer society" Wholesaler " and maintenance of a warehouse at Mayakovskogo street, 18 in the Leninsky district "dated 02.12.2004 N 531/7 (t. 1, p. 104), agreement on amendments to the land lease agreement dated 04.29.2005. N 261/3 (vol. 1, l.d. 105).
The cost of repair and construction work to restore the heating main and steel overpass in the amount of 315,246 rubles. determined on the basis of the report of the limited liability company "E" N 49n-06/2006 (v. 1, case sheet 18-37), the cost of the assessment amounted to 2,400 rubles. Thus, the amount of damage caused by PO "O" as a result of a road traffic accident amounted to 317,646 rubles. 00 kopecks (315,246 rubles + 2,400 rubles). The plaintiff's real costs for the restoration of damaged property amounted to RUB 326 103. 62 kopecks, which is confirmed by a certificate of the cost of work performed and costs for February 2007, invoice N 00000014 dated February 28, 2007 and payment documents (payment orders N 1001 dated March 20, 2007, N 1002 dated March 20, 2007. 2007, promissory note N 10 in the amount of 176,103 rubles 32 kopecks - v. 1, l.d. 130-134).
By letter of 03.07.2006 N 4, the closed joint-stock company "M" informed PA "O" about the refusal to pay insurance compensation due to the fact that the road traffic accident occurred in the plaintiff's inner territory and therefore does not apply to insured events of civil liability of the owners vehicles (v. 1, l.d. 14).
The appeal of the plaintiff to the defendant for voluntary compensation for the damage caused was left by LLC "S" without satisfaction (vol. 1, p. 14).
These circumstances served as the basis for the appeal of PA "O" to the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic with this claim. In support of the stated claims, the plaintiff refers to Articles 1064, 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
The defendant, objecting to the satisfaction of the claim, indicated that the plaintiff had not proved the ownership of the heating main and the steel overpass, there was no wrongfulness of the behavior of the tortfeasor as a necessary condition for the application of Article 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; in the territory where the road traffic accident occurred, no measures were taken to organize traffic (no sign "Height Limit" on the steel overpass and the pipeline) in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Law of 10.12.95 N 196-FZ "On road safety movement "(vol. 1, l.d. 50-51).
In the opinion of the court of appeal, the court of first instance came to a lawful conclusion about the validity of the claims of PA "O".
According to paragraph 1 of Article 1064 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, harm caused to the person or property of a citizen, as well as damage caused to the property of a legal entity, is subject to compensation in full by the person who caused the harm.
In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a legal entity and citizens whose activities are associated with increased danger to others (use of vehicles, mechanisms, high voltage electrical energy, atomic energy, explosives, strong poisons, etc., the implementation of construction and other related activities, etc.) are obliged to compensate for the harm caused by a source of increased danger, unless it is proved that the harm arose as a result of the indefinable force or intent of the victim.
The owner of a source of increased danger may be exempted by the court from liability in whole or in part also on the grounds provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 1083 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
Legal entities and citizens shall compensate for the harm caused by their employee in the performance of labor (official, official) duties (paragraph 1 of Article 1068 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
According to article 1082 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, one of the methods of compensation for damage is compensation for losses.
By virtue of Article 15 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a person whose right has been violated can demand full compensation for the losses caused to him, while losses are understood as expenses that the person whose right has been violated has made or will have to make to restore the violated right, loss or damage to it property (real damage), as well as lost income that this person would have received under normal conditions of civil turnover, if his right had not been violated (lost profit).
The materials of the case confirm the infliction of damage to the plaintiff related to the road traffic accident (explanations of P. of 06.06.2006 (vol. 1, ld 54, vol. 2, ld 12-14), explanations of Sh. from 06.06.2006 (v. 2, l.d. 15), the resolution on termination of proceedings in the case of an administrative offense dated 07.06.2006 (v. 2, l.d. 4).
The actual inflictor of harm is an employee of LLC "S" P. The driver's actions are in causal connection with the harmful consequences that have occurred. In confirmation of the ownership of the vehicle by LLC "S", a copy of the technical passport dated 16.11.2005 N 18 ОМ 452910 was presented in the case materials (v. 2, p. 16).

The arguments of the defendant that the plaintiff, in violation of Article 21 of the Federal Law of 10.12.95 N 199-FZ "On Road Safety", paragraph 2.14.12 of GOST 23457-86, approved by the Decree of the State Standard of the USSR of 24.06.86 N 1685, did not designate the overpass and heating main with a warning sign "Height limitation", rightfully rejected by the court of first instance.
In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 1083 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if the gross negligence of the victim himself contributed to the occurrence or increase of harm, depending on the degree of guilt of the victim and the tortfeasor, the amount of compensation should be reduced.
The fact that there is no sign "Height restriction" on the damaged heating main does not in itself indicate the fault of the injured party.
According to paragraph 2.14.12 of GOST 23457-86, approved by the Resolution of the USSR State Standard of 06.24.86, N 1685, the "Height restriction" sign should be used to prohibit the movement of vehicles, the overall height of which (with or without cargo) is greater than that indicated on the sign , if the distance from the surface of the road surface to the bottom of the superstructure of an artificial structure, power line, etc. less than 5 meters. A similar provision is enshrined in clause 5.4.10 of the current GOST R 52289-2004, approved by the Order of Rostekhregulirovanie dated December 15, 2004 N 120-ST.
The defendant, referring to the plaintiff's failure to comply with the specified requirements of GOST, believes that in the presence of the sign "Height limitation" damage to the heating main could have been avoided. The plaintiff's failure to take measures to equip the heating main with the "Height Limit" sign testifies, according to the defendant, to the plaintiff's (victim's) gross negligence, which contributed to causing damage to his property (paragraph 2 of Article 1083 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
The indicated arguments of the defendant are unfounded, since the absence of the sign "Height restriction" on the heating main belonging to the plaintiff is not causally connected with the damage to the heating main, admitted by the employee of the defendant.
In accordance with paragraph 23.5 of the Road Traffic Regulations, approved by the Government Decree of October 23, 1993 N 1090 (hereinafter referred to as the Road Traffic Regulations), the transportation of heavy and dangerous goods, the movement of a vehicle, the overall parameters of which, with or without cargo, exceed 2 in width , 55 m (2.6 m - for refrigerators and insulated bodies), at a height of 4 m from the surface of the carriageway, in a length (including one trailer) 20 m, are carried out in accordance with special rules.
In accordance with the Instruction for the carriage of bulky cargo and heavy cargo by road on the roads of the Russian Federation, approved by the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation dated May 27, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Instruction), the transportation of bulky cargo must be carried out with a mandatory control measurement of the height under overpasses and other artificial structures. and communications on the route of transportation (paragraph 5.11 of the Instruction).
It can be seen from the documents presented that, in violation of the above provisions of the Instruction, the necessary approvals and permits were not obtained, the driver (P.) did not make control measurements of the height, but was guided by the advice of the loader (P.'s explanations of 06.06.2006, explanations of Sh. From 06.06.2006).
Referring to the absence of fault of the causer of harm in the occurrence of losses, the defendant points out that the actions of P. did not establish the corpus delicti (resolution to terminate proceedings in the case of an administrative offense of 07.06.2006 (vol. 2, p. 4) , the decision of the Industrial District Court of Izhevsk of 13.04.2007 N 12-149-07 (t. 1, l.d. 144), the decision of the Supreme Court of the Udmurt Republic N 7-89 (t. 2, l.d. 145).
At the same time, when considering an administrative offense case on the fact of a road traffic accident, only the absence in the actions of P. of the offense entailing liability under paragraph 10.1 of the Road Traffic Rules, that is, exceeding the established speed limit without taking into account the characteristics and condition of the vehicle and cargo , road and meteorological conditions. However, the damage was caused by other reasons, namely, the fact that the driver did not take measures to find out whether the height of his cargo allows to pass under the heating main and the overpass, therefore, under such circumstances, it does not matter if the driver adheres to the speed limit,
The listed circumstances testify to the fault of the defendant and do not prove the gross negligence of the victim himself, which excludes the possibility of releasing the defendant from liability.
The defendant did not present evidence to refute the fact of causing damage, established by the documents listed above. Therefore, the court of first instance reasonably considered proven the commission of the unlawful act by the employee of the defendant, guilty of committing it, as a result of which the plaintiff incurred expenses to restore the damaged heating main and overpass (Article 65 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).
The arguments of the defendant that a road is located in the territory where the road accident occurred, since this strip of land is adapted and used by PO "O" for the movement of vehicles, which is confirmed by the Regulation on the access control regime of the enterprise PO "O", rejected by the court of appeal on the following grounds.
In accordance with Article 21 of the Federal Law of 10.12.95, N 196-FZ "On Road Traffic Safety", measures to organize traffic in order to improve its safety and road capacity are carried out by federal executive bodies, executive bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local government bodies, legal entities and individuals in charge of highways.
The concept of "roads" is given in paragraph 1.2 of the Road Traffic Regulations and is defined as a strip of land or the surface of an artificial structure equipped or adapted and used for the movement of vehicles.
The territory on which the road accident occurred was provided by PO "O" for the operation and maintenance of the warehouse base and, in accordance with the Road Traffic Rules, is the "adjacent territory", that is, the territory immediately adjacent to the road and not intended for through traffic of vehicles (courtyards, residential areas, parking lots, gas stations, enterprises, etc.). The fact that the territory of the base, in fact, is a technological site, and not a road, is confirmed by the fact that on the available cartographic and schematic materials of the territory provided by PO "O" funds, not indicated (Resolution of the administration of Izhevsk on the provision of a land plot dated 02.12.2004, N 531/7 (vol. 1, p. 104, 109), a plan of the land plot (vol. 1, p. 101-103), map (plan) of the land plot provided for lease (annex to agreement N 261/3 (vol. 1, ld 108), scheme of the incident (vol. 2, ld 7, 8) ...
In addition, the damage to the heating main that occurred on the territory of the base by the insurance company was not regarded as an insured event, since it took place not on the road, but on the internal territory of the organization.
The court of first instance assessed this circumstance, lawfully referring to subparagraph "and" of paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Federal Law of 25.04.2002 N 40-FZ "On compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners" and subparagraph "k" of paragraph 9 of the Rules of Compulsory Insurance civil liability of owners of vehicles approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 07.05.2003 N 263.
In addition, the Regulations on the access control regime of the PO "O" enterprise, approved by the chairman of the PO "O" Council on 01.09.99, presented in the case materials by the defendant, provides that in the event of damage caused during loading, unloading of goods, as well as on the territory of the enterprise, the owner of a vehicle that has caused harm to the owner of the enterprise, or to third parties, is liable for the damage caused in the manner prescribed by law (clause 7 of the Regulation). This provision was known to the employees of the defendant, which is also located on the territory of PO "O" at the address: Izhevsk, st. Mayakovsky, 18.
According to the plaintiff, the amount of losses incurred for the restoration of the damaged heating main, in accordance with the report of the limited liability company "E" N 49n-06/2006, is 315,246 rubles. (vol. 1, l.d. 18-36). The appraisal was carried out by the limited liability company "E", which has a license dated 04.09.01, N 000766, certificate dated 13.10.2005 N 432 (v. 1, l.d. 47-49) and has the right to carry out appraisal activities ...
The cost of services for the assessment of the specified damage in the amount of 2,400 rubles. the plaintiff was paid, which is confirmed by the payment order dated 03.07.2006 N 4230 (vol. 1, l.d. 59).
The court of first instance calculated the amount of damage caused in the amount of 308,910 rubles, based on the costs incurred by the plaintiff for repairs, excluding the cost of scrap metal under the acceptance certificate of 16.11.2006, N 4834, and also in the amount of 2,400 rubles. in terms of the cost of assessing the damaged property, which in total amounted to 311 310 rubles.
In such circumstances, the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic of November 26, 2007 (operative part of November 20, 2007) is legal and justified, adopted in accordance with the norms of substantive and procedural law and cannot be canceled (Article 271 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) ...
The state duty on the appeal applies to its applicant in accordance with Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.
Based on the foregoing and guided by Articles 176, 258, 268, 269, 271 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Seventeenth Arbitration Court of Appeal
decided:
the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Udmurt Republic of November 26, 2007 in case No. А71-234 / 2007 shall be left unchanged, the appeal - dismissed.

The decision can be appealed against by way of cassation proceedings to the Federal Arbitration Court of the Ural District within two months from the date of its adoption through the Arbitration Court of the Perm Territory.
Information on the time, place and results of the consideration of the cassation appeal can be obtained on the website of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Ural District www.fasuo.arbitr.ru.

Good afternoon, dear reader.

In this article, we will again be talking about. This time, the meanings of road signs 3.11 - 3.16 will be analyzed, i.e. signs directly related to the characteristics of the vehicle (weight and size).

Among others, signs of height limitation, weight limitation and vehicle length limitation will be considered.

Let me remind you that earlier in the series of articles "Traffic signs" articles were published:

Weight limit sign

The mass restriction sign prohibits the movement of vehicles whose actual mass exceeds the mass on the sign:

In this case, the movement of vehicles weighing more than 7000 kg is prohibited. Naturally, this restriction does not apply to passenger cars B.

This sign is installed, for example, in front of bridges in order to take into account their carrying capacity and to prevent overloading. Also, the sign is installed in front of the ice crossings. Violation of its requirements can be very dangerous, because can lead to the destruction of the ferry and submersion of the vehicle under water.

Sign for limiting the mass per axle of the vehicle

The sign limiting the mass per axle of the vehicle (popularly - limiting the mass per axle) prohibits the movement of vehicles with at least one axle having a mass exceeding that indicated on the sign:

In the sign from the example, this is 6,000 kg.

This sign can be used in conjunction with plates 8.20.1 and 8.20.2:

Accordingly, in the presence of the first plate, the action of the sign applies to two-axle bogies, and in the presence of the second - to three-axle bogies.

The axle weight restriction sign is used, for example, during the seasonal restriction of traffic on federal highways. You can read more about this in the article "".

Height limit sign

Road sign height limitation prohibits the movement of vehicles whose height is greater than that indicated on the sign:

It is installed in front of structures with a span of less than 5 meters. Note that the sign is usually installed with a small margin (20 centimeters), but I do not recommend violating its requirements under any circumstances.

This is due to the fact that every year there are accidents in which trucks crash into bridges or overhead pedestrian crossings. Since a knocked-down bridge usually falls on the cab of a car, this violation does not bode well for the driver.

However, I note that collisions usually occur due to the fact that the truck has a raised body. Nevertheless, even just tall cars sometimes knock down bridges.

Width limit sign

The width restriction sign prohibits the movement of vehicles whose width is greater than the value on the sign:

This sign is installed in front of structures in which the passage width is less than 3.5 meters. The consequences of violating the requirements of the "width limitation" sign are the same as for the previous sign, i.e. the car can destroy the bridge.

Length limitation sign

This sign prohibits the movement of vehicles, as well as vehicles, the length of which exceeds the length indicated on the sign:

The length limitation sign is designed to prevent vehicles that are too long from hitting road sections where they cannot pass. For example, we are talking about a narrow carriageway, sharp turns, etc.

Minimum distance limitation sign

The minimum distance restriction sign prohibits drivers from leaving the distance between cars less than that indicated on the sign:

Usually this sign is installed in front of sections of the road with limited carrying capacity. For example, we are talking about bridges and ice crossings. Also, this sign is installed in front of weight control points.

It might be helpful to read: