| With the rapid growth of the amount of autos in China, there are more and more traffic accidents. Personal harm compensation in traffic accident case has become one of the most important types of infringing compensation case tried by the people's court. Starting from the trial practice of personal harm compensation in traffic accident case, this thesis demonstrates the definition of main body responsible for the compensation as well as the relevant difficult problems in judicial practice through illustrating the principle of attribution of liability in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case. The purpose is to perfect the relevant system in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case. This thesis is divided into 3 parts to describe as the following:In the first part, the author states the principle of attribution of liability in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case. Firstly, the author illustrates the definition of traffic accident as well as personal harm compensation in traffic accident. Secondly, the author introduces the development of principle of attribution of liability regulated by civil infringing compensation case in traditional infringing acts laws. In addition, the author also states the change of domestic and foreign legislation. The principle of attribution of liability regulated by civil infringing compensation case in traditional infringing acts laws includes delinquency principle, non-delinquency liability and being just liability. What's more, the author illustrates the change of attribution of liability in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case in China as well as that set up in Traffic Safety on Road Law which is brought in line with international practice. According to Traffic Safety on Road Law, legislators set up different principle of attribution of liability as for different traffic activity bodies: for the insurance company, they apply for the non-fault liability; as for the accident between the autos, it applies for the fault liability principle; as for the accident between the auto and the non-auto including pedestrian, it applies for the non-fault liability principle and offsetting the fault principle. Moreover, the author discusses the reason why the accident between the auto and the non-auto including pedestrian applies for the non-fault liability principle and why the liability is reduced or called off.In the second part, the author introduces the judicial definition of subject of liability in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case. Firstly, it makes clear that the person responsible for the accident and subject of liability in personal harm compensation in traffic accident are two different concepts. Secondly, the author states how to maintain the subject of liabilities for compensation in the situation that the owner of the auto is different from the person responsible for the accident, domestic and foreign regulations and mainstream theory. In Chinese judicial practice, operation governing and operation profit belonging Duality theory is applied in defining the subject of liabilities for compensation in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case. Thirdly, the author discusses the definition of the subject of liabilities for compensation in the controversial types of traffic accident in judicial practice. For those personal harm compensation in traffic accident case, in which the auto is stolen, robbed or seized; register with the license stolen from others or the number of the license plate, based on the Duality theory, the troublemaker is attributed with the liability. If the owner of the auto does not insure the auto against the traffic accident, he should be attributed within 30% liabilities. In the situation that the driver is an employee of the owner of the auto, the employer should be attributed with the liability; if the employee has serious fault, he should share the liability with the employer; if the employee drives the auto without the permission of the employer, the employer should be attributed with the liability and he can ask for the fine from employee; in the situation of renting, lending, contracting and linking itself up with others, the controller or the profit operator should be attributed with the liability and those sharing the profit such as the contract issuing party should be jointly liable; in the situation that the auto is bought based on installment and the ownership is maintained, in addition, the auto is not transferred, the buyer should be liable; if the auto is being repaired, taken care of or mortgaged, the person responsible for repairing, keeping and mortgage should be liable; in the situation of the learners of the auto in driving school, the driving school should be liable; if the accident is caused by the coach, the coach should be liable; in the situation that there are others except for the owner of the auto, the owner of the auto should be liable; if the person taking the lift has fault, the liability attributed to the owner of the auto can be lessoned and the compensation items and scales are defined according to the details. In addition, the author takes the view that the subject of the liability for compensation should be defined based on concrete case. The author also proposes his opinion on the issue that the couple owns the auto together: defining the couple as the subject of liability for compensation on the basis of mutual property of the spouses.In the third part, the author introduces several issues in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case in China. Firstly, the principle of stronger one being attributed with the liability is discussed. In addition, the international theory and theory of domestic scholars are introduced. On the basis of comparison, the principle of stronger one being attributed with the liability is suitable for accident between autos and non-autos or pedestrians. As a result, the author suggests to mend the relevant laws. Secondly, the author states the applicable issue of the principle, contributory rate as well as exceptions of contributory negligence. What's more, the author proposes his own opinion. Secondly, the author discusses the definition of the liabilities in personal harm compensation in traffic accident case, showing his recognition on the definition of liabilities and sharing of the civil liabilities. The author proposes that the verification of the accident can be taken as the advice of the experts. If the security and transportation department have fault in verifying the accident, which causes the damage to the victims or the insurance company, they should be attributed with the civil compensation liability. Thirdly, the author gives suitable advice on sharing of civil compensation liability. Fourthly, the author proposes some suggestions for the issues in the compulsory insurance and traffic fatality. The author holds the view that the limit of amount of money in each item has not legal basis and does harm to the compensation of the victims; if the insurance does not perform the duty, the security authority can hand it in to the insurance regulatory commission which can punish it. Finally, the author discusses the issues in compensation standard for fatality and disability in judicial practice, especially the issue that same lives have different compensation, which troubles the rural citizens. The suggestion given by the author is that the domiciliary concept should be deleted to unite the compensation standard for the fatality and disability. The author also proposes his own view on last year standard, thinking that it is reasonable to deal with the accident based on the relevant compensation standard of the year before the accident.The inclusion part illustrates the research purpose and looks forward to perfecting the compensation law in traffic accident and deleting the traffic accident.
|
PDF Full Text Request