Disquisition On Joint Dangerous Actions

Today the real life is increasingly complex, in many cases the joint dangerous actions would be take place, but our current laws do not make special provisions for this issue, only the judicial interpretation of the Supreme People's Court affords a brief provision. That is why, on the one hand, in theoretical circles, although scholars have made actively exploring on it, but we have very inconsistent understandings, especially in the attribution of joint dangerous actions, constituent elements, requirement exempting. On the other hand, in our current trial practice, the courts use their own theory to make decisions, this leads to the confusion in the trial practice. Therefore the objective of the common system of joint dangerous actions is founded, to the maintenance of the unity and authority of the judiciary, to protect the legitimate rights and interests of innocent victims, and safeguard social order and achieve fairness and justice is of great significance.In the latest judicial interpretation of the Supreme People's Court "personal damages cases on the trial applicable interpretation", the concept of the joint dangerous actions provided in the light of the German Civil Code's common actions, which should be amended and made a wide understanding. Through exploring the relationship of the joint dangerous actions and other common violations can be drawn a more broad definition for joint dangerous actions, that is emphasis on the actual perpetrator unknown. Through exploring the history and evolution of the joint dangerous actions system, that can be known the joint dangerous actions in the bud stage, the system emphasized the actual perpetrator unknown, and the Germany in 1900 defined a more stringent standard for joint dangerous actions. With the passage of time, to meet the needs of real life complex situations, a growing number of theory tended to define it in the liberal way, and gradually introduce the actual perpetrator unknown standard to define joint dangerous actions. The Joint dangerous actions' broad definition performed in specific attribution basis, that is "fault and strict liability mixed", reflected in the constituent elements:First, the subjective state of joint dangerous actions perpetrator includes fault, intent, no-fault, and the people haven't meaning liaison;Second, the objective of joint dangerous actions doesn't act "commonality" as necessary, or even some dangerous actions that may cause actual harm does not exist, and dangerous perpetrator's act can be specific point;Third, the joint dangerous actions of a causal relationship is optional and presumed causation. Fourth, the result was not caused by all common dangerous perpetrators, but we do not know the actual perpetrator. In the joint dangerous actions issue, all the perpetrators are responsible for the victim with associated responsibility. Use the actual of perpetrator unknown standard to define joint dangerous actions, which widen the scope of it, namely the expansion of the scope of responsibility, this will enhance relief to the victims. Then based on the balance of interests, exempting subject should be more relaxed setting. If a common danger can prove he did not implement its dangerous behavior, then he can not bear the liability of joint dangerous actions, without the need to prove others really victimization perpetrator.