Legal Analysis Over The Intervention Of Idiosyncrasy In Injury Cases

In judicial practice, cases related the intervention of idiosyncrasy in injury sued occasionally. However, there are verdicts of great divergence on the merits of similar cases, due to the imperfect legislation, lack of identical standards in the judicial practice, as well as differences in the understanding of the theory. Such divergence not only greatly undermines our judicial authority and judicial credibility, but also prejudices the protection of human rights. The analysis of the intervention of idiosyncrasy in injury cases can help to characterize and handle such cases. This dissertation falls into four parts as follows:In section one, the typical intervention of idiosyncrasy in injury cases and the verdicts on were presented. The general characteristics are concluded on the merits of such cases.As well as the problems in such cases are also posed.In section two, issues involving the intervention of idiosyncrasy in injury cases are analyzed. A clear definition of idiosyncrasy is suggested. The theories behind the causal relationship and aggregated consequential offense involved in characterizing and handling such cases are discussed.In section three, the controversial point of view over the characterizing and handling the intervention of idiosyncrasy in injury cases are analyzed. A comparison among the characters of the characterizing and handling the crimes of the intervention of idiosyncrasy in injury cases, accidents, intentional assault, involuntary manslaughter and intentional homicide is made.In section four, suggestions over the characterizing of the intervention of idiosyncrasy in injury cases are made. The characterizing and handling of such cases in a variety of situations are analyzed. And optimal suggestions of legislation are considered.