Railway Passenger Transportation, The Carrier's Liability For Damages

According to the traditional theories in the civil law, the existence of duty is the presupposition to judge whether the subject should take the responsibilities or not. So it is significant to define the subject's responsibilities. In order to study the carrier's compensation for damage in railway transportation, we have to begin with the carrier's civil duties. Among the railway transportation relationships, the content of the carrier's duty is determined by its origins, which include agreements, drafted laws, as well as the theory on the duty of attention. This theory is embodied by the carrier's duty of security safeguarding.The blame-on rule is the grounds and criterion to define the subject's responsibilities. Generally speaking, the reasonability that the subject should take lies in its blame possibilities, namely, deliberation and negligence. Later, based on the theory of distribution justice, we have the theory of no-negligence, which is used to share the damages reasonably, but not to impose sanctions. In China, strict responsibility is taken to deal with the general treaty violation by the contract law while stipulates carrier's damage responsibilities to passenger's carried-on things with special provisions. It also stipulate the negligence occurred in the course of making the contract and after the termination of the contract. The tort law stipulates carrier's negligence in highly dangerous work. Influenced by attention-duty theory, the deduce negligence and negligence appear while carriers, as operator, violate security duty.The carrier's responsibilities in compensating for damage can be divided into three types according to their quality: the responsibility of violating a contract, the responsibility of tort and the responsibility of negligence in making the contract. They are different in the base, blame-on principle, constitute condition and scope of the responsibilities. In the case of the passenger's bodily hurt caused by the carrier's violation, passenger's can ask for the carrier's responsibility of violating a contract mentally and physically. That is only an exception. The carrier's responsibility of tort can be divided into two types: the responsibility of no-negligence and the responsibility of violating security duty. Those two tort responsibilities have different constitute conditions. Meanwhile, in the process of defining the responsibilities of violating acontract and tort, they are not harmonized and conflicts, between the railway law and the common civil law, needs to be modified further when the legislation lag behind, it is necessary to explain it by the using of scientific principles.When the carrier shoulder the responsibility of compensating for damage, it is easy to coincide between the responsibility of treaty violation and responsibility of tort. Generally, there are differences in blame-on principle, testimony-offering responsibility, user's responsibility, the effect of negligence treaty, the form of responsibilities, the scope of responsibilities, the ineffective prescription and the jurisdiction, etc.between the responsibility of negligence and tort. When the carrier shoulders the responsibility of compensating for damage, it is easy to happen that responsibility from treaty violation and responsibility from torts coincide .In responsibilities coincidence, the passenger has the right to choose requests .The bases of the passenger's right of requests vary with the rights he chooses, as a basis of a passenger's rights of requests, the railway law has its special quality, which should be paid attention to while passengers advocate the carrier's responsibility. When the right of requests they chooses is not proper, passengers should be allowed to change their procedural requests before opening of the court at the first level. If the passenger's reasons in lawsuits are not proper, the court isn't allowed to reject the suit and the solutions based on facts should be made on the basis of trying in the court.