| "Tort Liability Act", promulgated on December 26,2009,which criterion for judgement is different from "direct integration" and "indirect integration" stipulated by'interpretation to a number of issues applicated for law for the trial of personal injury compensation case'.Take whether it has subjective liaison chief elements, Distinguish between people without means to contact the co-infringement and infringement.Take forming aggregate or common causal relationship as a means to contact several people without infringing jointly and severally liable or copies's standard. The provision raised extensive debate for theorists and practitioners.and led scholars's rethink for no meaning for the contact person:First, the Similarity and Difference between no meaning for the contact person and Joint Infringement of Right; Second,the chief elements and substitutive characteristics for no meaning for the contact person; Third, responsibility for no meaning for the contact person.This paper focuses on case of road traffic accidents for Yindi company against Yuanlong company,Analysze the three questions above. First.compare the case with Joint Infringement of Right action, Analysis the conception, constituent elements and types.Make a conclusion that no meaning for the contact person is not Joint Infringement of Right action. Secondly, explore responsibility for no meaning for the contact person according to requirements of law by abroad and our country.Draw a conclusion that the case is no meaning for the contact person of common causal relationship, According to copies of the infringer to bear the responsibility. Finally, describes futher thoughts for such issues,Analysize the rationality to relevant laws and regulations, Make a conclusion that the infringement liability of each share to the common practice in the trial of a causal relationship of no meaning for the contact person may be based on negligence of the infringer's size and proportion,and proposed legal advice to solve such cases. |
PDF Full Text Request