| Tort Liability Law of People's Republic of China came into effect at July 1st, 2010. Its Article 17 reads "Where the same tort causes the deaths of several persons, an uniform amount of death compensation may be determined."(Saying Article 17 of Tort Liability Law in the essay) Which no doubt are an important innovation on death compensation rules as well as a reflection of new legislative ideas:similar rules have existed in Japan and Anglo-American Legal System for decades. Besides, the article plays an important role for enhancing litigation efficiency and comforting moods. It's a milestone of Chinese tort law.However, there are not only much criticism but also abundant doubts on it, which based largely on the following four reasons. Firstly, no clear understanding of the nature of death compensation occurs in the article. According to it, death compensation is a kind of compensation to life. Nevertheless, the truth is that life can not be equal to any price. Puzzlingly, the supported living expenses and such kinds of fee also included in death compensation according the article, which means that the article both admit that death compensation is the price of life and the lost caused by death. Beyond that, right of the claim for compensation for death disappears when death happening. Its loosening means too much free-measurement of judges. Secondly, Article 17 is a departure from fairness and justice, because it can not reflect the reality that there are great differences on the development of economics amid different zones and quite big rift between poor and rich in China. We must realize that there are many differences of every infringed, including salary, age and so on, based on which we cannot find fairness through death compensations of the same number. Thirdly, the article has so heavy conflicts with undergoing system of law that it can not blend in the whole system of law. These conflicts caused chaos in judicial practice. Fourthly, the article authorized not enough subjects the right of claim for death compensation that many people who has economical relationships with infringed cannot claim for compensations. To solve these problems, the most important work maybe explicating the nature of death compensation:it is not a compensation for life but the lost caused by deaths. What was more, related legislative work and judicial interpretations are very necessary for dealing with the conflicts of law and assigning benefits. Lastly, appropriate promotion by news media and successful reformation on household registration system can make the law desire respects from more individuals. According to some scholars, Article 17 may be used in other circumstances one day:where the same tort causes the injuries of several persons, an uniform amount of injury compensation may be determined. I have reservations about this. As mentioned above, neither life nor health can be equal to any price. Besides, different wounded are of different conditions. I'll focus on the problems and related solutions of the article in the essay. |
PDF Full Text Request