A Traffic Accident Caused By Thinking

Along with the development of relations between the two sides across the Taiwan Strait, the civil contacts between the sides become more and more frequent. And infringing civil disputes which traffic accidents cause also become more apparent. How to solve the disputes has become a question which is unavoidable in front of judges and scholars. And the particularity of relations between both banks has decided the particularity of the solution between both sides.It is well known that Taiwan area is always part of the territory of our country. Since the founding of new China, however, the Taiwan area and the mainland have been at the condition of political confrontation for a long time. Under different environments, the two sides across the Taiwan Strait, have respectively formed and developed very different systems with mutual different politics, economies, social cultures etc., and this has decided different law systems both banks have separately practiced, also has produced various conflicts in legal matters.The case is caused by a traffic accident, in which Tan, together with three other people sues one city long-distance bus transportation (group) company limited and the driver You for person damage compensation on road traffic accident. This article is mainly researched by unifying theory and practice, and the author hope to understand the handling of similar cases involving Taiwan compatriots through analysis of the case. This article is mainly divided into five parts:Part One, the summary of the case. The case is caused by a traffic accident for person damage compensation. The author will make a brief analysis on the cause of action, the case, and the major issues involved in the case, such as identification, applicable law and extra-territorial evidence;Part Two, recognition of the case. Dealing with foreign (jurisdictions) cases with conflict rules, the court must first identify the case. This part clarifies the definition of the identification and the basis for identification. Through recognition, this case is involved in determining jurisdiction (Taiwan) infringement dispute cases.Part Three, application of law. Although the Taiwan region is part of China's territory, because the two sides are in different jurisdictions, also subject to different cross-strait infringements, leading to the conflicts in the application of laws. There is no specialized inter-district private law in the mainland, so we usually deal with the rules of private international law. In accordance with the provisions of section 146 of General Principles of Civil Law, we can make the conclusion that the case should be applied of the mainland's laws, following the scope of compensations based on the legal provisions of the mainland, such as the standard for compensation. For the Supreme Court "On Personal Injury Compensation Cases before the Law Application to the Interpretation of a Number of Issues", in the first paragraph of Article 30, it provides for the compensation standards for "high principle". And because of its uniqueness, the author will be singled out for analysis.Part Four, the extra-territorial evidence. The plaintiffs of the case are Taiwan residents, and part of evidences they provided came from the Taiwan region. On the evidence of that, the author thinks we should play the role of "Strait Exchange Foundation" (the "SEF") and "Association for Relations across the Taiwan Strait"(the "ARATS"). At the same time, the author suggests that the mainland should introduce some specific rules of evidence to provide a legal basis for solving similar cases.Part Five, conclusion. This part makes a conclusion on the main legal problems involved in the case.