Research On Several Problems In The Traffic Accident Case Of "Exceed Standard Electric Bikes"

In recent years,the electric bikes(the electric bikes referred in this paper are electric two wheel bikes)has been widely used by the public,because of its convenient mode of operation,obtaining prices and low cost using,but it had not form a strict regulatory environment to keep up with the popularity of electric bikes.Most of the electric bikes produced by manufacturers are far exceeding the current national standards on a number of core indicators,such as top speed and vehicle weight,in order to cater to consumers' need,and the result is a sharp increase in the number of traffic accidents caused by such exceed standard electric bikes.In the judicial practice,There are many traffic accident problems caused by such e exceed standard electric bikes.First,there are many legal relationships,such as insurance legal relation?tort of traffic accident?infringement legal relationship caused by product defects,these relationships are intertwined.The second is the traffic enforcement department define the exceed standard electric bikes belongs to the motor,and the division of responsibilities on this basis,as well as its special proving effect in civil trials,lead to the confusion of the judicial referee,the victim's loss of equity has not been adequately relieved.Therefore,this paper intends to obtain the problem consciousness and theoretical direction from the case,the perplexity of the theory and practice brought about by the way of asking questions.This article is divided into the following five parts.The first part is the raise of question.With Lin Fangqing,Zhang Zhirong sue Gan Dejun,linshui changping motor transport co.LTD.,the Chinese people's property insurance co.LTD and SiChuan Yu Qilin technology co.,LTD.traffic accident responsibility dispute as an example.Through the introduction of its basic case and the the court decision as well as the subsequent extension case,lead to the dispute between the two parties,point to the problems need to be analyzed deeply.The second part is the specific analysis of several controversies in the case.This part firstly analyzes the question that if the legal relation of traffic accident infringement and the legal relation of product tort can be settled in the same case.There are two different views.The first is that the two are different legal relationships that cannot be tried together.But toavoid contradictory judgment and quickly settle disputes,the two should be tried together.The second point is that traffic accident confirmation is often the most important evidence in the civil trial of traffic accident disputes.It has also played a crucial role in the outcome of the civil trial.Based on the evidence attributes of traffic accident confirmation,the author analyzes the rules of the application of the traffic accident confirmation in civil trial,and the difference between accident liability and traffic accident tort liability.Thirdly,the definition and social background of electric vehicles are briefly introduced.Furthermore,the product liability type and causality relationship between the manufacturer and the manufacturer are analyzed.The conclusion is that the electric vehicle manufacturer Yu Qilin company should bear the tort liability.The fourth point is the root of the controversy,that is,accountability.In this part,combined with the practice investigation,this paper emphatically analyzes whether Lin sihong,the driver of exceed standard electric bikes in this case,should be liable for compensation.In the current situation of the lack of prior supervision of electric bikes in the country,it is obvious that ordinary consumers have a lack of expectation of legal liability after the fact that they are assumed to be motor vehicles.Secondly,from the point of view of the infringement of the number of people who have no intention to contact,and the understanding of the indirect combination thereof,the main body of the case should bear the responsibility.The third part is the research conclusion of this case.The author points out the author's point of view.