Research On The Guardians’ Liability

Since the enactment of tort liability law,the issue of guardian responsibility has been the focus of debate in the field of civil law.There are different opinions on the understanding and application of paragraph 1 and paragraph 2 of article 32 of the tort liability law in the academic circle,mainly focusing on the imputation principle of guardian responsibility and the responsibility form of guardian and ward.As for the imputation principle of guardian responsibility,there are fault liability theory,presumption fault liability theory,no-fault liability theory,fair liability theory and multiple imputation principle.As for the form of the guardian’s responsibility,it mainly focuses on whether the guardian has the ability of responsibility and should bear the responsibility.In the field of practice,when courts in different places apply this provision,there are also unclear interpretations and great differences in judgment results.In order to solve the problem,we must go back to the source and straighten out the nature,imputation principle and assumption rules of guardian responsibility.The current stage is a critical period for the revision of the civil code,and the draft of tort liability has entered the second stage of deliberation.Therefore,it is necessary to study the issue of guardian responsibility.The first part of the article will start from the field of practice,from the court judgments around the summary of the court in such cases in the use,interpretation of the law.Different local courts have different views on the principle of imputation and the rules of liability of guardians,resulting in the phenomenon of "different judgments for the same case".The second part of the article discusses the legal nature of guardian responsibility,which is also the basis of the study of guardian responsibility.In terms of its fundamental nature,guardian responsibility is the responsibility of the act of the guardian,and should be the vicarious responsibility.However,in the tort liability part,there are different understandings of the legal nature of guardian responsibility among the articles,which leads to the logical confusion.The third part of the article mainly through comparative research,grasp the current international development trend of the principle of custodian responsibility,combined with China’s national conditions,to make understanding and judgment of the principle of custodian responsibility.The custodian responsibility in China is no-fault liability,which is also in line with the legislative purpose of tort liability law.But in the future,we should pay attention to the recognition ability of the ward and draw close to the principle of mixed liability.At the same time,this part explains the constitutive elements of the guardian’s responsibility.The tort liability of the guardian is not the premise for the guardian to undertake the responsibility,and the independent property of the guardian is not the reason for the guardian to undertake the responsibility.The fourth part of the article specifically analyzes the liability form of guardian responsibility.In such cases,the guardian is always the subject of tort liability,and the guardian does not bear any responsibility,so there is naturally no joint liability and liability by shares.In terms of specific rules of the guardian responsibility,the larger problem of tort liability law article 32 the relations between the two paragraph is difficult to grasp,made with the guardian read his ward a lecture on how to take responsibility,the unknown parameters between should be based on the vicarious liability and no-fault liability,on the basis of the "internal and external relations",to straighten out the guardian responsibility logic relations,the second paragraph of article 32 of essentially gives the guardian to be guardian of property rights,is for the guardian and the guardian of the internal relations.In the future,the risk can be transferred through liability insurance system and state compensation to achieve the balance of the interests of the three parties.