| Along with the social economy swift and violent growth,all kinds of motor vehicles in streets,people bring convenient while enjoying them,also for the traffic accident suffering the pain and loss.Traffic accident cases occupy the first place in the number of civil cases,and the legal relations are complicated.Therefore,it is extremely difficult for judges to deal with cases.The development of public transport must ensure the unimpeded and safe roads.Article 89 of the "tort liability law" in China will be as a new type of tort liability stipulated in item damage liability chapter,but the theory and practice has been to prevent passage of liability for damage caused by the main body,nature,imputation principle and liability issues such as large differences exist.The supreme people's court on the application of law of road traffic accident damage compensation cases,the explanation of some issues(hereinafter referred to as the"explain")of article 10,thought has been clear about the responsibility main body and imputation principle to solve the above problems,is still not provide a place for scholars of the dispute.This paper consists of four parts:The first part studies the identification of public road managers in the harm caused by obstructing traffic.First of all,this paper discusses the controversial issue of road managers from the theoretical and practical fields.Secondly,the paper classifies eight different types of road management organizations.How to face different kinds of road management organizations that interfere with responsibility,the main responsibility of the damage caused by the passage content respectively from the law,the contract,the actual management behavior,behavior of construction managers accurately identified public roads.The second part mainly discusses the nature of the liability of the public road manager in obstructing traffic injury and solves the qualitative problem of the liability.First of all,the nature of liability of road managers is discussed,and the nature of compensation liability of managers is discussed with theoretical explanation and system explanation,respectively from the perspective of private law and public law.Finally,it can be concluded that the road manager is not responsible for the state compensation but for the civil liability,not for the object but for the action.The third part analyzes the imputation principle of the responsibility of the public road manager in obstructing traffic injury.In theory,the doctrine of imputation of liability for obstructing the traffic is divided into "monism" and "dualism".This part starts from the theoretical disputes,classifies and summarizes the academic disputes.The author thinks that the road manager responsibility is presumption of fault principle,and from four angles respectively on the argument,foundation especially thick ink to rewrite the rationality of the "dualism",provides the to apply liability with presumed fault.The fourth part discusses the responsibility of the manager of public road in obstructing the damage caused by traffic.This part is the focus of the article,the implementation of the responsibility of managers.In a sense,there are similarities between road managers and security obligators,and road managers are often regarded as security obligators.After the academic debate,scholars believe that the road management should assume the supplementary responsibility,which has reached a consensus.Since article 37,paragraph 2,of the tort liability act is limited in its scope of adjustment,it cannot cover all tort liability for obstructing the traffic.In accordance with the provisions of article 12 of the tort liability law,the road manager and the specific actor shall bear the respective responsibilities.Therefore,the form of responsibility assumed by road managers is not unique,it may be supplementary or partial. |
PDF Full Text Request