Research On Tort Liability In Traffic Accidents Caused By Rental,Lending Vehicles

The Road Traffic Safety Law has set up the rules of liability for road traffic accidents in the context of protecting the weak,and the 76 th article distinguishes two kinds of traffic participation subjects,so as to apply different liability principles.On this basis,article 49 of tort liability law also uses the operation domination and operation interests from Germany and Japan as the criteria for determining the subject of liability.However,in Germany and Japan,the identification rule of the subject of motor vehicle traffic accident liability is based on the single principle of no-fault liability.Therefore,in judicial practice and theory,a broad understanding of operation domination and operation interests is adopted,and the motor vehicle owner is also included in the subject of liability.However,article 49 of the Tort Liability Law of China adopts the standard in a narrow sense,which limits the rigidity of the subject of liability to the user,and directly rules out the possibility of assuming liability when the owner is not at fault based on the facts of lease and borrowing,which deviates from the original intention of the standard and also causes some confusion in practice.Otherwise,since article 49 th of the Tort Liability Law makes a vague treatment of the form of responsibility of owners when they are at fault for a traffic accident caused by rental,lending vehicles,it does not indicate whether the corresponding liability is proportional liability,joint and several liability or supplementary liability.As a result,this provision is also extremely confusing in application.After a large number of case search and analysis,we found that there are still 14% of owners who rent and lend motor vehicles can still be able to carry out domination and benefits from motor vehicle operation,"user" of the article 49 is means someone who has operation domination and operation interests of motor vehicle,in traffic accidents between motor vehicles and non-motor vehicles and pedestrians,we should draw lessons from the theoretical practice of Germany and Japan to make a broad interpretation of operation dominance and operation interests.When both the owner and the user are able to enjoy operation domination and operation interests,the subject of ownership and the subject of tort liability are not separated,and they shall bear the liability for damages as "the motor vehicle party",and article 49 of the tort liability law shall not be applied to exclude the liability of the owner.However,in the traffic accidents between motor vehicles,the operation control and operation interests should be interpreted in a narrow sense,and the owner should only assume the corresponding responsibility when at fault.The operation domination and operation interests are different in the leasing and borrowing situation.The operation domination and operation interests of the lender are reflected in the fact that the lender rides in the vehicle and the vehicle drives for its interests,while the operation domination and operation interests of the lessor are represented in the form of continuing to manage the vehicle and the rent collected through the lease contract.the judge needs to judge according to the period,the object and other factors synthetically.Leasing motor vehicles leads to the inconsistency of owners and users,which is essentially a tort of several people,combining the subjective fault types and behaviors of the two,we can judge whether the two constitute joint tort or separate infringement,so as to determine the form of liability.First of all,when the leasing of motor vehicles leads to the inconsistency between owners and users,if they pursue the consequences of damage,or they are laissez-faire in the knowledge that a traffic accident may occur,there is no doubt that their actions are joint infringement.Secondly,owners and users should have paid attention to the occurrence of some kind of damage,or they foresee that the results may occur,but believe that they can be avoided on the basis of certain facts.They all have the fault of gross negligence in subjectivity,and when their faults are consistent,they commit a joint infringement.Otherwise,they commit separate infringement,there are two main situations: First,the owner intentionally lent the defective motor vehicle,allowing others to drive the vehicle to have a traffic accident,and then vehicle failure and driver's operational error did cause damage to others.Second,the owner and the user are respectively at fault,but the fault is not the same or similar.For example,the owner lent the vehicle without checking it,and the user has the fault of speeding,retrograde and so on in the driving process,which eventually causes the traffic accident.Joint infringement corresponds to joint and several liability,the respective infringement corresponds to the proportional liability,the share of responsibility depends on the censure of the act and the causative potency.If the fault of the owner cannot be the cause of the traffic accident,or if the intentional infringement of the user interrupts the causation of the initial act,the user shall be solely responsible.