On The Sorts Of Liabilities Of The Torts Of Multiple Tortfeasors Without Mutual Mind

Based on the scientific definition of Torts by multiple tortfeasors without mutual mind,this article studies the possible sorts of liabilities for the torts by multiple tortfeasors withoutmutual mind. Furthermore, this article analyses the relative defects of the existedregulations of the sorts of liabilities for the torts by multiple tortfeasors without mutualmind, and gives some corresponding improving methods.This article is divided into three parts. The first part makes a scientific definition ofsorts of liabilities for the torts by multiple tortfeasors without mutual mind, and analyses thepossible relative sorts of liabilities. It is believed that to make Torts by multiple tortfeasorswithout mutual mind into existence, three points should be satisfied: each tortfeasor accordsthe requirements to produce a tort liability, the damage each tortfeasor is corresponding to isthe same or indivisible one, and there is no mutual mind between each tortfeasor. The termof Torts by multiple tortfeasors without mutual mind is not the one with explicit meaningand single kind, but one that can be divided into several sorts not all corresponding to jointand several liabilities. As to the relative sorts of liabilities, there are four ones: joint andseveral liabilities, several liabilities, single liability and supplemental liability.The second part analyses the relative defects of the existed regulations of the sorts ofliabilities for the torts by multiple tortfeasors without mutual mind. Firstly, dividing thesorts of liabilities by the standard of causation is not scientific and reasonable. What’s more,the existed regulations make the relations of benefits and risks between the partiesunbalanced. As damaging risks from the tort of multiple tortfeasors are much more severethan the ones from the tort of only one tortfeasor, which is unreasonable. Furthermore, theexisted regulations about supplemental liability are contrary to the notion of liability ofoneself. At last, the existed regulations about damages from the workers is stark and isn’tbeneficial for the regulation of the workers.The third part gives some corresponding methods to improve the defectsaforementioned. In the circumstance of concurrent acts leading to the torts by multipletortfeasors without mutual mind, if the victim owns fault to the damage and his faultoutweighs the one of a certain afflicter, the afflicter should not shoulder the joint andseveral liabilities. Supplemental liability should be applied in the circumstances where someone is damaged while acting for some else’s benefit, such as helping act, personalassisting work and e mergency.