Research On The Determination And Acceptance Of The Responsibility Of Parabolic Damage In High Altitude

Before the implementation of the Tort Liability Law,since there were no relevant legislative provisions on parabolic damage at high altitude,in practice,local courts made different judgments on high-altitude parabolic damage for different reasons.The promulgation of Article 87 of the Tort Liability Law means that the parabolic damage from high altitude has a clear legal basis.The legal gap concerning the parabolic damage at high altitude before the implementation of the Tort Liability Law has been remedied.Regrettably,after the implementation of the Tort Liability Law,the problems related to parabolic damage at high altitude have still not been effectively resolved.The reason is that scholars and judges lack sufficient understanding of Article 87.From the interpretation of Article 87 of the NPC Law Committee,it can be known that the legislative concept of the law is to relieve the rights of victims,rationally distribute losses,and protect public safety.However,since the legislative concept of Article 87 tends to protect the rights and interests of victims regardless of the principle of responsibility of tort law,it has also caused quite a lot of controversy.Article 87: Regardless of whether damage is taken as the standard,the innocent building user is classified as a strong person,and the victim is classified as a weak person,so that many innocent building users share the loss of the victim.Some viewpoints claim that Article 87 reflects the development trend of tort law in various countries of the world,and believes that the responsibility of building users who may be harmed is conducive to the protection of public safety,and can encourage building users to take measures to prevent the occurrence of parabolic damage at high altitude.The responsibility of high-altitude parabolic damage in order to relieve the rights of victims to collectively blame the users of the building,resulting in the unclear normative structure.The normative structure of Article 87 is very different from other tort liability rules.Explain that Article 87 cannot stay at the level of the meaning of the text,and should combine the analysis of the legislative process and normative logic.Article 87 refers to the expression “giving compensation” for the nature of liability,but it can be analyzed from the normative design and legislative process of Article 87 that the nature of liability is actually the liability for compensation.In terms of the principle of imputation,Article 87 does not apply to the existing principleof liability for tort liability.It is based on the presumption of perpetrators,and some people call it presumption.In addition,in judicial practice,judges often encounter difficulties in terms of entities and procedures in the process of interpreting and applying Article 87.On the basis of accurately understanding the legislative concept and normative structure of Article 87,judges should consider the litigation efficiency of high-altitude parabolic damage liability disputes and explore the way out for judicial practice dilemmas.There are suggestions on how to improve the liability system for parabolic damage in high altitude,such as public law relief,social relief,and insurance relief.Although these several programs help to relieve the rights of victims,they cannot play an active role in identifying the truth and preventing damage,and lack the necessity and feasibility.In order to identify the true injurer and prevent the occurrence of high-altitude parabolic damage,the responsibility of the building manager should be strengthened,and the property service company that fails to fulfill the safety precautions should be responsible,thus motivating the administrator to take preventive measures to make the 80 th Seven plays multiple functions such as punishment,relief,and prevention.