The Compounding Of The Liability Attribution In The Field Of Social Security

Does a corporation bear the same responsibility of compensation and damages for theindustrial injury whether it is in fault or not? The only applied standard at present fordeciding how much compensation the wounded shall be paid for is the result of theinjury. So is the standard in other fields of social security. One of the theoretical proofsapplied in the fields of social security is the simplex No-Fault Principle. The dissertation focuses on the compounding of No-Fault Principle and FaultPrinciple when applied. First of all, the word Compounding is interpreted hereunder asthe co-existence of and conflicts between more than two rights produced by legal factsin the fields of social security. There are varieties of forms of Compounding one ofwhich is the compounding of Principles of Liability Attribution including No-FaultPrinciple and Fault Principle. The two principles are so different that any mechanicalclassifying any acts into either Principle will possibly result in one-sidedness. Thecompounding theory of the two principles' application is deemed to be of great help toexplain pending disputes for the moment. Secondly, there is great possibility of compounding of No-Fault Principle and FaultPrinciple in social security law which, as a new subject of law, belongs to the so-calledsocial laws. Social laws coming into being during the process of "private laws beingpublic" in the west as well as "public laws being private" in our nation hold a concept ofvalue being different from the traditional single public or private ones, which results inthe difference in the liability of Social Security Law. At the same time, the issue ofbearing the liability is related to the scope of the Principle of Liability Attribution,which is resulted from the weak position of objects of the acts and the vast requirementsby the social security on the one hand, and on the other hand from the fact thatindustrial injury is partly caused by corporations' fault of negligence of efficientlyprotecting the rights of employees in the pursuit of high profit. The above two reasonsresult in the difference of Principles of Liability Attribution in the field of socialsecurity, that is, when pinpointing the liability great consideration shall be taken into ifNo-Fault Principle is applied and the acting part is in fault, which is the above-saidcompounding in the application of No-Fault Principle and Fault Principle. When thecompounding of the two principles being analyzed, such notions as Strict Liability andFault Inferring are compared and differentiated and examples of the compounding in thefield of industrial injury insurance are illustrated. The other strong point of this dissertation is how to assume the liability caused bycompounding which exists in the application of No-fault Principle and Fault Principle.Firstly, the theoretical evidence is that the liability assumption is grounded on aLiability Attribution Principle basis. Secondly, the way of liability assumption based onthe theory of social responsibility and moral obligations shall be deemed to be differentfrom those traditional ways of public law or private law. On the one hand, the liabilityassumption is the socialization of the obligation in this field. On the other hand, theforms of liability assumptions by the part with fault shall be considered, by doing soseeing the relationship and difference between the two in the aspects of types, scope andconditions of the way of liability assumption. Lastly, the author compares the differencebetween the ways of liability assumption in the compounding, in the act of committingcrimes , in the acting part's own fault, and the third party's fault.