Preliminary Analysis On The Construction Of The Tort Criterion Of Liability System

About the discussion of tort liability principle of accountability system construction, I am going to start the topic with the most basic legal liability. Legal liability is due to infringe upon the legal rights or violation of statutory obligation entitled by the state organs. And it is a mandatory legal relationship which involves the main direct obligation, namely result in the violation of statutory obligations incurred by the primary reflections. Usually when we consider the responsibility under the guidance of fault liability, we will also consider the tortfeasor's subjective fault. It is meaning ful for the subjective consideration at this moment.. But it will mean nothing of the subjective discussion when the results is due to one's personal behavior but it has nothing to do with his subjective faults. The law must give us guidance and evaluation to find out the responsibility, therefore, it is still necessary to consider the problem about imputation liability. The author thinks that this is the right logic from the legal standard level, namely the legal entity. The establishment and responsibility of the tort liability are totally two disparate concepts. The establishment is about what specific elements will be contained to constitute a tort liability. While the right infringement responsibility is a course about the specific allocation after it is settled which is on the basis of the establishment of the tort liability. Imputation is to figure out that what ground should be taken to make the person take the responsibility after whose behavior has brought the damage to the stuff. This basis reflects the value judgements of the law, that the law should take the standard as value judgements of the actor's faults or the damage results that has happened, or the consideration of justice. The encroacher principle is essentially a kind of value judgment, which is mainly a value judgemnets about the person's imputation legally.As the core of tort imputation principle of the traditional civil law or even the infringement law, the fault liability has been playing a very important role. Fault liability refers to anyone who has infringed other's rights or interests from his own subjective fault (intentionally or negligently), he ought to be in charge of the damage or dangerous state from his behavior. Fault liability includes general form and a special form of presumed fault. Fault presumption can also be called "fault presumption", which refers to ease or exempt the proof obligation from the victim on the basis of certain objective facts and conditions to get the presumption of the actor's fault. It is a special form applicable for fault liability that the person who is proved should take the responsibility of proving his innocence. The principle of fault liability is applicable to the general infringement. The use method of fault liability principle, refers to the certification of the subjective fault of the actor. It has two kinds:one is that the one who quotes should advocate. It is usually the victim that will quote and advocate, while the other one don't need to prove his innocence. Second is the burden of fault presumption of the presumption has fault, and identity card bear prove himself not at fault liability.Besides the fault that the tortfeasor assumes tort responsibility, can law find and recognize that the infringer bears other tort liability fixations? The answer is yes. Because the aggressor has no fault subectively. It is due to the behavior (as a person and not as a duty violates the agreement) or legal reasons caused some unfavorable results (damage and dangerous state), and there are still some connection between them. It means that under this circumstance we can found a core constituents of imputation. We can make a conclusion that the reason for fault liability fixation is a dangerous behavior caused by the expected risk injury or damage to a state of danger. This danger is totally different from that of daily life, but special provisions of law. This kind of dangerous behavior and dangerous results are objective facts. It is difficult or impossible to control by the actor intelligence. It has specific content, tools, and techniques, specific working behavior. And these specific content damage, tools and methods belong to production, necessities of life, is the social needs and permitted. This kind of dangerous behavior is predictable results, namely when the person implementing the risk behaviors, it can foresee the results of action. So this danger is accountability required by law, which can form the value judgment. Because dangerous behavior is unified regulation of law, in danger of responsibility of law founded elements should be illegal behavior, the damage of facts, three elements of causality and does not include the fault. Therefore the author of no fault liability and discussed the no-fault liability for fault to understand a view from the "have" and "no" dichotomy of "seemed to make" fault liability principle and no-fault liability principle combined with a logical unobstructed, structure the rigorous imputation system. The fact is that the internal logic chaos, also will appear to have the choice for fault liability or no-fault liability, which is apparently wrong, The alternative view is that no-fault liability principle applied with the victim "no aggressor fault" situation, imputation considerations for injures, only in the liability of the fault, the victim. The third is considered the fault, which is in the responsibility, properly or negligence offset to consider the situation, obviously this kind of understanding is wrong. The reason that non-fault liability is not a fault liability of imputation's main problem is that it is not good for the liability fixation. So the tort law in fault liability should be established as the risk liability outside besides special fault liability tort of imputation principle.In conclusion, the imputation in tort law system should be binary, including general tort liability for fault and special tort liability for danger.