Research On Joint Torts

Article 3 of the promulgated joint torts:"Where two or more persons cause an injury to others by joint intent or joint negligence, or their injurious acts are directly combined and result in the same injury consequence even if there is no joint intent or joint negligence, a joint tort shall be constituted, and the tortfeasors shall bear joint liabilities in accordance with Article 130 of the General Principles of Civil Law","Where two or more persons have no joint intent or joint negligence, but separately commit several acts that are indirectly combined and result in the same injury consequence, they shall bear corresponding compensation liabilities respectively in appropriate proportions upon the extent of their faults or the reasons of such injury."which means the adopt the Theory of Compromise referring to the system of Joint Torts.The Joint Torts derives from , and Germany and other countries that establish the system of Joint Tort drawing lessons from Germany, adopted the Theory of Subjectivity at first. But along with the acceleration of the industrialization, traffics, environmental pollutions, public hazard and other accidents became much more than before, the defects of the Theory of Subjectivity became much more obvious. In the accidents hereinbefore, as the actor do not have the intention communication, the actors do not constitute Joint Tort and do not assume the joint and several liability. To change the situation, there came the Theory of Objectivity and the Theory of Compromise. The definition of Joint Tort turned controversial; the discussion between the theories was intensive. The author begins the discussion from the issue to distinguishing the definition of Joint Tort and the relations between the Joint Tort and the un-internuncial joint torts. In addition to the preface and the epilogue, the Article consists of the chapters and sections as follow:The first chapter is the general discussion of the Joint Tort, and is to research the Joint Tort in comparative method. After define the Joint Tort that will be discussed in this article, the author compared the legislation and repudiation of Germany, France, Japan and the Taiwan of China, and research the history of Joint Tort in comparative method.The second chapter is the definition of Joint Tort. Firstly, the first sector states the theories considering the definition of Joint Tort, which means the Theory of Subjectivity, the Theory of Objectivity and the Theory of Compromise. The second chapter compared the three theories and concluded that the definition of Joint Tort should be based on the Theory of Subjectivity. Also, the intention communication means joint intent and joint negligence. Joint fault consists of joint careless and inadvertent negligence and joint overconfident negligence. The Theory of Objectivity and Compromise are reasonable on some aspects, but they are unreasonable on much more aspects. So they cannot be accepted.The third chapter is the research on un-internuncial joint torts. The first chapter introduces the promulgation of un-internuncial joint torts in the . The author thinks the promulgation does not embrace all the un-internuncial joint torts and it should not bring the"Direct Combination"into Joint Torts. The second sector is the research and analysis of un-internuncial joint torts. The un-internuncial joint torts consist of three kinds as follow: Portion Causality, Complimentarily Causality and Concurrence Causality. Portion Causality is a kind of solely torts in nature. According to the extent of behavior combination, the Complimentarily Causality can be divided into"direct combination"and"Indirect combination", the tortfeasors should bear joint liabilities and corresponding compensation liabilities respectively. In the Concurrence Causality, the tortfeasors bear quasi-joint liabilities. At last, the author describes the several torts in graph.