Supplementary Liability Of Schools In "The Third Party Infringement" Cases

In recent years,the incident of "third party infringement" in schools has caused widespread concern in society.In such incidents,there are divergent views on the specific circumstances of the school's responsibility and the form of responsibility it should bear.Article 40 of China's Tort Liability Law clearly stipulates the supplementary liability of schools in cases of "third party tort".However,as China's original form of liability,the application of supplementary liability has many controversial issues.In order to further clarify the dispute,explain the connotation of supplementary responsibility,and improve the applicable path of supplementary liability,the thesis focuses on the theoretical disputes and practical dilemmas of supplementary responsibility undertaken by schools,the comparative investigation of supplementary responsibility in foreign legal systems,the rational basis for schools to assume supplementary responsibility The four aspects of the perfect path for schools to undertake supplementary responsibilities have been discussed in depth.The first part explores the theoretical controversy and practical dilemma of schools taking on supplementary responsibility.The theoretical controversy is mainly reflected in the necessity,rationality,order and recovery right of the supplementary liability system.The practical dilemma is mainly reflected in the vague scope of application,conflict of understanding of "corresponding supplementary responsibility" and lack of supplementary liability procedures.The second part compares the supplementary responsibilities of foreign legal systems.From a theoretical perspective,the supplementary responsibilities of German law and Swiss law are full supplementary responsibilities,not limit supplements;the "primary and secondary responsibilities" of American law are equivalent to the non-joint liability of the civil law system.Looking at it from a practical perspective,German law prefers not to be jointly and severally liable and compensate the right holder,while American law prefers to share the responsibility and compensate the right holder.Through a comparative study,it can be found that the responsibility forms of majority infringement are increasingly diversified.The third part discusses the rational basis for the school to assume supplementary responsibility.Joint responsibility and responsibility concept,system system and development trend conflict,specific responsibility and responsibility type,concept and litigation risk conflict,not really joint responsibility and responsibility concept,litigation risk conflict and supplementary responsibility coincide with responsibility concept,Institutional systems and development trends demonstrate the necessity of a supplementary liability system as a whole.The jurisprudence of intentional infringement of absolute liability,the jurisprudence of security guarantee obligations and the legal nature of risk liability guarantees more deeply show the legal basis of schools taking on supplementary liability.The fourth part proposes a perfect path for schools to undertake supplementary responsibilities,and advocates that the scope of application of supplementary responsibilities should be clarified,the connotation of "corresponding supplementary responsibilities" should be accurately defined,and theapplication procedures for supplementary responsibilities should be reasonably constructed.The scope of application of Article 40 of the Tort Liability Law should be limited to the situation where the third party 's intentional infringement is combined with the school 's negligent tort,and the school 's negligence should be a general negligence.For other situations,different forms of responsibility should be selected according to the subjective faults of the school and the third party.The supplementary scope of supplementary liability shall be based on the premise that the third party cannot compensate,and the supplementary scope of supplementary liability shall be limited to the "corresponding" scope.The right holder should be allowed to sue the third person and the school at the same time.If the right holder sues the school alone,the court may direct the right holder to add a third person as the defendant.The order of supplementary liability should be positioned as the right to perform or execute the defense first,and be realized in the performance or execution procedures.