Study On The Responsibility Of Animal Caused By Zoo Animals

After the millennium, with the rapid development of public infrastructure, the zoo has become a good place for many people to relax on weekends, both relaxed mood, but also appreciate the natural scenery. The zoo animal wounding cases caused by the frequent occurrence of people's attention, the last case of Badaling tiger has become a hot topic. "Tort liability act" for the zoo to develop a special legal provisions, but the actual implementation of the results, there are huge defects in the legal provisions. Tort liability law Seventy-eighth and the imputation principle of the 81 different, one is no fault liability is a presumption of fault liability. Such provisions at the beginning of the legislation has aroused wide discussion of the academic community. The exemption contract between the visitors and the zoo operator is effective in more and more animal damages events using the presumption of fault liability is to adapt to the society, how to determine whether the operator responsible zoo is a problem. Although the "tort liability law" in the formulation of 81 to take into account the prevailing environment and the possibility of future problems, but the actual implementation of the results contrary to the legislative purpose, there are many disputes in the case verdict.This article from the "tort law","contract law," a number of angles, zoo zoo animal tort cases, the responsibility of the park and the responsibility of tourists.In the first part, the typical cases are cited, and the intuitive thinking is given to the readers through the case of Badaling tiger bite.The second part, find out the focus problem in the case of centralized analysis properties such as the definition of Zhou, Zhao off illegal behavior, what is the assumption of risk or the victim intentionally or gross negligence and general negligence, the exemption clause in the agreement validity of admission is valid, and is responsible for the Badaling wild Zoo Zhao and Zhou a personal injury extent of liability.The third part, on the basis of the previous parts, a detailed analysis of the current zoo animal damage caused by the legislative defects and practical problems, compared with foreign advanced cases, reflecting the gap.The fourth part, through the first three parts, combined with the legislative purpose, the academic point of view, the actual situation and a series of factors, solve the problems of focus in the zoo animal wounding cases, put forward two kinds of schemes and to facilitate the implementation of the legitimate. The advantages and disadvantages of the two schemes are compared for reference.