The Research Of Judicial Practice On The Distribution Of Legal Liability In Traffic Accident

In the trial practice,legal disputes often appear in no liability certificate of traffic accidents.As for the reason,on one hand judges do not have the professional knowledge of dealing with traffic accidents,and there are many ambiguous,controversial rules making it difficult to choose what can be used in such cases on the other hand.As a result,it is hard for judges to convince people when dealing with such cases.By investigation of existing judgments in such cases,this article summarizes four ways in judicial practice of dealing with such cases: The amount of the fault of the party is determined on the basis of the numbers of violations of the provisions of the safe driving and the severity of the fault,and the size of the legal liability of the party is determined on the basis of the size of the fault.In cases where the facts are difficult to be identified,the investigation of the facts of the accident is avoided by the rules of evidence,and the attribution of the responsibility in the accident is directly determined.When there are many possibilities for the facts of the accident,the judge tends to examine which type of fact provided by the party is more in line with poof standard of high probability and then deduces the truth of the traffic accident and determines the distribution of the legal liability for the accident.For some traffic accidents where the law clearly stipulates responsibility,the judge will directly determine the liability for traffic accidents in accordance with the provisions of the law.From the above analysis,the four methods used by courts to hear such cases are mostly in circuitous tactics.The main reason is that increasing complexity makes it more difficult for judges to meet new challenges.Taking a relatively conservative trial is often the safest option for judges' personal interests and court unit interests.Just as Judge Posner said,the development of science and technology and the external world have made the cases faced by judges more and more complex,which are also more difficult to be understood and decided than ever before.Facing the challenges of complexity,the U.S.judicial system does not treat issues more realistically,instead it moves towards a more formalistic and bureaucratic path,evading the needs of the real world in a manmade fortress.This is both a kind of criticism and a warning to Chinese judges.To avoid the needs of the real world often means the decline of the judge's sense of mission and the crisis of “formal rule of law”.By analyzing judicial decisions in this type of case,this article helps to present the judicial practice in a more clear way,in hope of solving such issues.