About The Constitution And Assumption Of The Security Obligor’s Tort Liability

With the rapid development of China’s economy, more and more violations of safeguards obligations infringements produce. And making composition and responsibilities clear has become an important issue. First proposed security obligations is in the "Personal Injury Compensation interpretation" and confirmed in "Tort Liability Act". Despite the legal and judicial interpretation may be invoked, but the study of the safety and security obligations is still far from complete. Especially in Article 37, paragraph 2 perspective, when the third party acts, how to identify the constituent elements and responsibilities is still a problem, so it is necessary to study it.Who bears the security obligations is from operating activities or other social actors in "Personal Injury Compensation interpretation" of Article 6, paragraph 2, while in " Tort Liability Act" it is from managers in public places or mass organizers. With the continuous development of society, people have become increasingly demanding security so security obligor may further expand the scope. Enumerated type is unable to meet its main scope for an expanding demand, so in addition to the main range of enumerated, we should be set in general terms of the range of body. Liability Principle of security obligations, is the basis for judging the established liability and the premise of security responsibilities. When the third party infringement, breach of security obligations tort liability should apply the principle of presumption of fault As long as the victim to prove that he violated the duty of care within reasonable limits, it can be assumed that the fault of people with security obligations.Elements of liability established include:tort, damage results, causation, fault. However, under Article 37, paragraph 2 perspective, the constituent elements there are many special places. Behavior is a combination of elements of the security obligations of the omissions and acts as a third party. Damage includes not only personal injury and property damage. Which caused damage to the "others" should be clearly. I think we can use the concept of the person in possession of land to clear the "other". About Causation, I believe that the involvement of the behavior of a third party does not affect the relationship between human behavior and victim damage. Security obligations subjective fault is negligence. Security obligor bears a rational duty of care, breach of the obligation does constitute infringement.Under Article 37, paragraph 2 perspective, safety and security obligations are reasonable to assume added responsibility. Security obligations should bear the corresponding supplementary liability refers to a limited liability supplement. The design of the liability regime will not only help fill the harm the victim, but also take into account the interests of safety and security obligations. It reflects the principle of fairness in civil law. Due to the special nature of supplementary liability, Court in the implementation proceedings should be considered entity defenses of security obligations. Only when the execution of the third party property is insufficient to pay off victim’s debt, before the implementation of security obligations of the property. Supplementary form of liability litigation, I think we can learn from the United States formed implicated Joinder system. As for the scope of supplementary liability safeguards obligations, it should be bear the responsibility within its range can preventor halt the damage:According to a third person and security of the obligor’s fault size determine the share of responsibility. Security obligations in the case of not doing security obligations, there is no right of recourse.