Identified Security Obligations Supplementary Liability

Security obligations have been identified in most countries, the rule of law in tort law. In the form of tort liability when a third person who is not a security obligations, the civil law and the common law and more to joint and several liability or responsibility by shares, our concept is unique supplementary liability. Supplementary liability security obligations, although controversial in academic circles, but has overall legislative and judicial sure. Judicial practice security identification supplementary liability obligations, focus and the key is how to determine whether the cases or circumstances sufficient to constitute each of the constituent elements, worth exploring viable criteria and methodologies in the conventional four elements in order to be able to judicial practice more accurate application of this provision.In addition to the introduction and conclusion of this article is divided into four parts:The first part of the responsibility for safety and security obligations supplement overview, a brief description of the theoretical origins complementary responsibilities, basic properties, through a certain comparison and demonstration endorsed the supplementary liability responsibility as an independent manner, and the Tort Liability Act security obligations supplementary liability legislation and judicial practice performance made a positive evaluation of identity.The second part describes the security obligations complementary responsibilities Elements, combining theoretical analysis of judicial practice how to identify the four constituent elements: illegality must be met, the negative behavior of two features on the idea, not entirely human performance security obligations, materials and management system of three factors that have obligations degree standard hierarchy should be treated differently and do progressive judgment; subjective fault type is appropriate to negligence, fault using objective criteria; causal relationship, including the fact of the existence of a causal relationship and there is a causal relationship or value on a few comments made to determine the scope of responsibility of causality; damage objects covering personal interests and property rights, judgments need to distinguish clearly the results of direct responsibility for the damage and additional damage to the results of responsibility.The third part of security obligations assumed added responsibility on the specific expression of some personal views: formal proceedings to facilitate as much as possible to the victims, the burden of proof should respect the legislative and moderate inversion, application execution condition achievement presumption is envisaged that implementation of measures points stage of selection, the judicial right of recourse should be approved in principle, but can be used for special restrictions.The fourth part way through a case analysis of four exceptions enumerated several third party intervention infringement but security obligations should not be accountable to supplement responsibility: the sole responsibility of the third party under uncontrollable behavior or by shares responsibility; not individual responsibility to do acts of physical causes security obligations result of the presence of the force and the damage or press copies of liability; safeguards obligations under certain circumstances obviously intentional several liability; no responsibility for safety and security obligations not when.