A Study Of The Liability In The Tort By A Ward

In civil law,when other people’s interests is infringed by a ward, both theguardian and the ward should assume the liability for the damage. However, theinterpretation of Article32of Tort Liability Law does not follow the civil lawtradition. On the opposite, it applies risk responsibility. The ward’s property willdecide both the liability of the ward and the liability of the guardian. This rule is sospecial that there is no other country has applies this form. In fact, it is not reasonablethat the rule does no consideration of the ward’ fault as well as regardless ofguardian’s fault.In China, there are two different opinions which try to interprete Article32of theTort Law. The tradition opinion believes that a ward has to assume the first placeliability if he has his own property, then his guardian should assume the remainingcompensation.The recent opinion supposes that the guardian should assume all thecompensation, but the ward who has his own property should assume compensationcost. Recent opinion may be more appropriate if we just try to apply this rule, butsome complicated problems still exist.All the problems can be solved by the tradition rule of civil Law. If lawmakersgive up risk responsibility and choose fault liability, then ward and guardian willenjoy more freedom. If equity liability can be applied to Tort law, then ward’sresponsibility will be independent.If the capacity for liability can be designed by TortLaw, ward will assume liability for his fault. This is the best way to improve Article32of Tort Liability Law.