The Relation Between Insurance Liability And Tort Liability

There are differences and relationship between Tort law and Insurance liability. The evolution of tort law led to the development of insurance liability, and insurance liability continue to promote the development of the evolution of tort law. Insurance liability to the insured person's civil liability to others for the insurance subject of the insured person when other people's legitimate civil rights violations, the insurer will assume this should be borne by the insured tort liability. Performance for the consequences of violations of the victim is not the personal property or interest, the law to fill the victim's harm, then order the infringer to liability. In general, the contemporary system of damages by the tort law, insurance system and social security system together. The social security system in China has not yet been set up today, we study the system of damages, the more should be concerned about insurance liability and tort law the relationship between the two.The insurance liability system has been widely used in the tort law in practice. However, in the theoretical level, the relationship between the two is still a focus of academic debate. Damages scholars to explore more from tort insurance liability or the perspective of research alone, the two separate, very little linking the two. This has caused a variety of theory and practice of damages between the conflicts and contradictions. In view of this, of tort law and insurance liability for an in-depth study of competing with certain theoretical and practical value.This article is divided into three parts, the basic content of the framework are as follows:The first parts introduces the concept and basic features about Tort law. This part serves as a foundation for the whole analysis. This chapter obtains from the abuse of authority and insurance liability's concept limits, to summarize the abuse of authority history succession variation process, the induction refines the abuse of authority four types, namely general abuse of authority and special abuse of authority, violation property rights behavior and violation personal rights behavior, alone abuse of authority and joint tort, positive abuse of authority and negative abuse of authority. Even some people act according to its development change, proposed that an item with the comprehensive insurance system substitution present right infringement responsibility's plan, namely no longer undertakes the liability of compensation to all right infringement harm fact by the party causing an injury, but compensates - - the members of different social classes by the Insurance company only to purchase the insurance liability then. Regardless of the two are the negative side or the positive way display its close relation, thus has laid the foundation for the later word thorough analysis.The second part introduces the concept, development and characteristics of insurance liability. This chapter serves as a link between the preceding and the following. First of all, it has carried on the comparative analysis in the right infringement responsibility and in the insured liability function, namely the right infringement responsibility has the compensatory function and the deterrent function, has the place which with insurance liability's basic function distinguishes identically, the two promote mutually and restrict. Afterward from the legal principle theory of law, the damage compensate principle with was suitable in the domain reason the origin which competed to the abuse of authority and the insured liability gathers to carry on the analysis. Indicated although the two compete in the existence merge its part of functions to be possible to counter-balance mutually, many scholars also ideal thought that the insurance liability can substitute for the abuse of authority law, but in its function's display, in the influence cannot replace mutually as before to the society.The third part introduces the relationship about insurance liability and tort law. With a comparative analysis of function of tort law and insurance liability in order to reveal the same and the difference between insurance liability and tort law. Carries on the comparative analysis from the right infringement responsibility and the insurance liability in the actual utilization process's function, promulgates both same and the difference. And this chapter uses the case analytic method competes from the property insurance and the life insurance angle elaboration right infringement responsibility and the insured liability gathers. Usually says, after the property insurance accident occurs, because the third person (right infringement side) the reason causes the insured to lose, has the insurance contract relations and the right infringement relations competes gathers, this time, the third person (right infringement side) should take the untrue association liability of compensation with the insurer. And elaborates the relationship tort liability and insurance from the perspective of Property Insurance and Life Insurance based on case studies. Two legal relationships form between debt not common occurrence reason, is also not based on the common legal relationship, is completely because the different reason peace treaty decides the different debt which occurs accidentally to compete gathers, is one kind of generalized request power competes gathers, he may choose of a request fulfillment debtor avoids other debtor's debt, may also when a request fulfillment debt has not been able to satisfy first to debtor of requests the fulfillment debt again to another debtor, but may also simultaneously approach all debtor to request the fulfillment debt. But in the life insurance accident, in life insurance's insured has the death, the disability or disease because of third party's behavior and so on insurance risk, occurred based on the insured liability and the right infringement responsibility has competed gathers, but the region wealth danger insurance contract lay in the insurer paid the insurance money after the insured or the beneficiary, do not enjoy to the third party additional compensation right, but the insured or the income person was still authorized to the third party to request the compensation.