On The Compulsory Motor Vehicle Third Party Liability Insurance In The Range Of

With China’s rapid economic development, increasing the number of motor vehicles, traffic accidents occur frequently on the social development of a tremendous threat. Compulsory Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance (Traffic Insurance) as the protection of the interests of accident victims of legal tools, has the world’s countries (regions) of the approved legislation and practice. Our recent introduction of the“Republic of China on Road Traffic Safety Law,”“compulsory insurance regulations, motor vehicle traffic accident”and the“People’s Republic of Tort Liability Acf”to build a strong narrow our legal system. Unfortunately, one does not define the scope of third parties to be clear, it is not perfect.In view of this, the author of the thesis topic, to pay compulsory insurance for the perfect use for the initiate.This basic logic is:theoretical study of the-Present Situation Analysis of Judicial-Comparative observation-construction of the law. Basic research methods for the comparative analysis and empirical analysis. And to define the scope of third party anchored by around a third party to define the scope of the existing series of analysis and discussion of important issues, propose solutions and improve further the recommendations of related issues, can expect to pay high insurance of benefit. In addition to full introduction and conclusion, is divided into three parts.This introduction clearly states that the current strong narrow the scope of the provisions in respect of third party over a single, combined system does not support the introduction of relevant, which led to the widespread practice of judicial controversy:because of inconsistencies in the judge’s understanding of the problem, not uniform law enforcement standards, the people’s court often go their own way, even in the hearing that case, the upper and lower levels, the court may sentence a completely different conclusion, the outside world evenly split, is not conducive to maintaining unity of the law is not conducive to the protection security transport the legitimate rights and interests of accident victims. To this end it is necessary to discuss that issue.The first part, the first general insurance in the third person to define, and then elaborated in the strong narrow definition in the third person, that is, except as a road traffic accident and the car insured persons can become victims of cross-compulsory insurance in the third person, the protection by the strong narrow; followed can not be a third person on the vehicle and the insured person under the control of their vehicles on the role of different levels, to analyze two broad categories:on the one hand to the direct control of vehicles, often the victims of both accidents, it is the perpetrator of the accident the insured.With the insured people in different incidents in different identities, such as the loss of his driver injured in traffic accidents and other cases of four different situations, to clarify the identity of the insured is not static; the other hand, simply can not be implemented directly on the vehicle control, even indirectly, with limited efforts to control the personnel of the vehicle, by describing has happened in reality, the injured person the car is not a clear line of typical cases, efforts to introduce the car who were injured in traffic accidents since the loss of many cases, at all levels People’s Court there are different reasons for their verdict decisions. In summary, through the introduction of the above, reflecting the strong cross-injury insurance legislation Personnel and of the cars out of the insured to pay compulsory insurance, the judicial practice in many non-operating conditions with the reality of the situation.The second part is strong narrow range in the third comparison. As the national situation, to pay compulsory insurance with different features, is divided into clearly defined through legislation the scope of a third party (the United Kingdom, Japan and Taiwan) and non-legislative means to clearly define the scope of a third party (the United States, New Zealand and other countries) two cases, introduction of these countries and regions to make the scope of compulsory insurance in the legislative history of the third person and theoretical results.The third part, the strong narrow view of the current third party to define the scope of the problems, on the one hand to correct the operation of our judicial practice errors, on the other hand by the Legislative Improvement of Traffic Insurance, in order to make up for Traffic Insurance on the scope of the third inadequate to maximize the protection of the legitimate interests of third parties. In summary, through comprehensive analysis and demonstration, the paper out of the traditional theory and judicial practice of the errors, will help in the judicial practice define the scope of the third person to form a unified understanding, and promote the people’s courts in adjudicating cases related to accurate appropriate sentence, to a greater extent to protect injured in a road accident the third person, and promote social stability and development.