The Study Of Compensatory Liability For Damages Caused By Throwing And Falling Objects Of Buildings

The promulgation and implementation of “tort law” is a milestone in thelegislation history of China. There are many institutional innovations in this law, oneof which is the compensatory liability for damages caused by throwing and fallingobjects of buildings provided in the article87. Article87identifies right to claimcompensation of the victims who suffer a loss due to unidentified falling objects ofbuildings, ending the situation of no same verdict for same cases. However there is abig controversy about doctrine of liability fixation, applicable conditions, liabilitysubjects, exemptions and the right of recovery of the compensation liability providedin the article87. This article intends to make a reasonable explanation to article87from the perspective of interpretation of the law, at the same time, combining thetypical cases after the implementation of “tort law”. This paper is composed of fourfollowing aspects:Chapter1: The basic theoretical analysis of compensatory liability for damagescaused by throwing and falling objects of buildings. It is pointed out that the doctrineof liability fixation of this compensatory liability is not the principle of faultpresumption， no-fault liability doctrine or equitable liability principle. Thiscompensatory liability is set for sharing the victims’ loss. Propose own view about the nature of compensatory liability for damages caused by throwing and falling objectsof buildings, hold that this compensatory liability is a legal compensation withcharacteristics of moral responsibility.Chapter2: The judicial practice and problems after the implementation of “tortlaw”. This part will focus on the specific problems after the implementation of article87from three typical cases.Chapter3：The constitutive requirements of article87. It is pointed out that thereare four constitutive requirements of compensatory liability for damages caused bythrowing and falling objects of buildings. Firstly，having the throwing and fallingphenomenon of buildings. Secondly, there is the fact that the victim suffers damage.Thirdly, it is difficult to determine specific offender. Fourthly, there have noexemptions. In this part, the author emphasizes that it should limit the scope ofapplication of article87, so we can introduce the criminal prepositional procedurewhen consider the third constitutive requirement.Chapter4: The legal effects of article87: compensatory liability for damagescaused by throwing and falling objects of buildings. Analysis the problem of litigationdefendants, and point out that the actual users of the building are responsible for theloss. Household-based compensation can be considered to share the loss. Propose oweviews about the mode of responsibility and the scope of compensation, and affirm theright to recourse against the infringer.