The Management’s Obligation For Encumbrances Causing Persons’ Damages On Highways

Highway has some particularity compared with ordinary road, which makes obstruction virulence event happened on the highway is different from general tort event, it involves the tort liability and the liability for breach of contract. With regard to this problem, the practice of judicial practice is different. Scholars also have different opinions. This paper focused on the highway manager; mainly talk about encumbrances cause person damage cases. The author analyzes the practices in the judicial practice, and attempts to re frame the highway management responsibility system to solve the problem.The first part raises the topic of this article.The second part introduces the practices in the judicial practice, and sums up the problems. At present, there are three kinds of practice.1. Highway manager bear the general tort liability.2. Highway manager bear the special tort liability.3. Highway manager bear the liable for breach of contract.The author analyzes the practices in the third part.The fourth part of this paper, after analysis after practice in a variety of practices, the paper focuses on expressway management responsibilities, clear the nature of expressway management responsibility, and improve the imputation principle, the burden of proof, etc.The fifth part puts forward some judicial suggestions.The sixth part is the conclusion, a brief summary of all arguments. In my opinion, the responsibility of highway managers is a kind of Security obligation, Managers apply fault liability, assume added responsibility. To solve the competition between tort liability and liability for breach of contract, you can through legal interpretation methods continue to narrow the differences between contract and tort liability for breach of contract, or by typed security obligations.