Scope Of Protection Of General Term Of Liability For Fault

Tort Liability Law of the People’s Republic of China came into force in2010.According to Article2thereof those who infringe upon civil rights and interests shallbe subject to the tort liability according to this Law.“Civil rights and interests” hereshall include18different kinds rights and interests. At the same time, according toArticle6Paragraph1thereof one who is at fault for infringement upon a civil right orinterest of another person shall be subject to the tort liability.The Article2is about provisions on the scope of protection of the tort law andthe Article6, Paragraph1is general term of liability for fault, there are still no sameunderstanding to the two provisions in theoretical circle today. The paper would showthat the Article2has no use to be the foundation of right to demand for delivery andcan not limit the application of the Article6, Paragraph1, its only value is to declarethe “Civil rights and interests” protected by this law. On the other hand, the Article6,Paragraph1thereof shall be deemed general term of liability for fault and the Article2declared rights and interests constitute of its scope of their protection. However,views of “rights and interests shall be protected” and “all rights and interests shall beprotected equally” got through semantic interpretation method which make legal loopholes. For that reason, this paper would like to make up for the loopholes throughteleologische reduction to the articles and also would set up a screen system whichmakes the rights (mainly imperium) and interests enjoy different protection atdifferent levels.This thesis consists of three parts and details thereof are as follows:Firstly, the paper proposes question and explains and clarifies the real meaning andfunction of Article2and Article6, Paragraph1. According to the articles, we wouldget the views that “rights and interests shall be protected” and “all rights and interestsshall be protected equally”. How to solve this phenomenon is still a problem.Secondly, from the perspective of comparative law interpretation, the authoranalyzes respectively the relevant provisions of France, Germany, Taiwan and Japanwhich belong to classical examples of civil law system and we share the similar torttheory.Thirdly, the author analyzes the classical cases in practice combined withcomparative law and related provisions of the Chinese tort law. It makes up for theloopholes through teleologische reduction to the articles and would set up a screensystem which make the rights(mainly imperium) and interests enjoy different degreeprotection.