Manager's Liability Of Breaking The Duty Of Safety-guard

Thomas Hobbes said: the security of people is the supreme law. The security of people means to guarantee the safety of people their properties, which is just the content of the obligation of security. Nowadays the legal relationship in our society becomes more and more complex. But the traditional tort law can't deal with some new problems because of the law's hysteretic and discomprehensiveness.The most important problem now is that persons who undertake some business or social activities idle to take some reasonable actions so that other persons suffer personal or property damage, but the victims can not get the full and timely compensations. Recent years, insecurity in serve places leads to a lots of cases of violation of consumer's rights. The research of safe guard duty is not deep enough, which provides no basic reason for those who have suffered as a result of a trot to request for liability of safe guard. The article analyzes the theory of civil duty of operator who violates the duty of safe guard.The first chapter of this article brings forward the problem, relevant results of other research and the method of research. It also sums up the background of the problem, which makes sense of theory and practice. The safeguard obligor replenishes the model that responsibility replenishes responsibility with on belonging to one kind of peculiar tort responsibility, belonging to tort law with a form. It is under pointing to condition leading to others be damaged in third people tort, the safeguard obligor has fault's, is able to guard against corresponding complement liability for damages born by the range inner possibly stopping damage in the person.The second chapter contains five parts. In the first part, the writer introduces basic theory on duty of safe guard and definite the meaning of duty of safe guard. Then it tells us about the current situation of legislation in duty of safe guard in China.The second part analyzes the nature of civil duty when the operators violate their duty of safe guard. First of all, the writer compares relevant legislations and theories on safe guard between the tow major genealogies of law. Then it reviews main opinions of the nature of safe guard in China, and tries to prove that the principle of duty of safe guard is based on the legal liability and the violation of the duty of safe guard is based on liability of trot.The third part is about the liability principle. It argues the application of fault liability principle from the view of comparation and social law. Moreover, the article proves that the people who violate the duty of safe guard should have fault, which is popular in legislation abroad and legal practice. Next it researches the standard of fault judgment.The forth part analyzes the causality of responsibility establishment and the exempted from liability. At first, the article presents the argument of between the supporters and opponents on the theory, and appreciates the supporters if they apply the relevant causality of responsibility to judge whether there is liability establishment or liability scope. Furthermore, it explains the exempted from liability of the operators, such as the fault of victims, the consent of victims and the violation of victims.The fifth part argues the types of liability for tort: direct liability and complementary liability. There are some arguments on complementary liability in theory and legal practice. For examples, the complementary liability should concludes the complementation of compensation order ,the complementation of responsibility scope and the right for people who take complementary liability to request damage from who violates the duty directly. It also contains the effect and the reasonability of the complementary liability.The last chapter of this article gives the conclusion and highlight of some important problems. Nucleus of article is analysis of duty of safe guarantee. Author expounded producing and developing of duty of safe guarantee. Think nature of the duty is legal duty, not behavior in tort. Violating the duty and causing harm to victim constitute tort. People who have duty should undertake the responsibility of compensation, article definite content and scope of safe duty. The principle of responsibility is fault deduction, according to different violation of obligation.