On The Liability Of Non-motor Vehicles And Pedestrians To The Motor Vehicle

There has been a dispute in judicial practice about whether the owner of a motor vehicle should be compensated for the damage caused by a traffic accident between a non-motor vehicle or a pedestrian and a motor vehicle,when the fault belongs to the non-motor vehicle or the pedestrian.On December 24,2015,The Supreme People's Court released the file ”some specific problems in the current civil trial ”,which requested that trial works should comply with the value judgment of The Traffic Safety Law,in the traffic accident liability disputes between motor vehicles and pedestrians or non-motor vehicles,should reduce some responsibility of motor vehicles,so as to evaluate the fault of pedestrians and non-motor vehicles,meantime should not support claims of motor vehicle for pedestrians and non-motor vehicles.Although this view unifies the judgment scale of the issue in the judicial trial,the author thinks that this "one-size-fits-all" judgment view needs to be discussed.According to the definition of traffic accidents,The Traffic Safety Law does not adjust all types of traffic accidents,nor does it adjust the tort liability of a pedestrian which causes damage to a motor vehicle due to his fault or accident,it does not have the extensibility.Moreover,it is not against logic to evaluate the same traffic accident separately from different perspectives,when facing traffic accidents "caused" by non-motor vehicles and pedestrians,the general provisions of tort liability should be applied.In traffic accident infringement,the principle of "superior burden" of the motor vehicle is embodied in the principle of no-fault liability in legislation and proof liability in judicial.It does not violate the principle of "superior burden" when pedestrians and non-motor vehicle assume liability for compensation to motor vehicle.The principle of superior burden should not be abused,in order to prevent serious imbalance of interests,the theory of compensation responsibility should not be the basis.In order to avoid the situation that the personal compensation obtained by the victim is not equal to the compensation for the loss of motor vehicles,the principle of fault liability and the principle of fault offset should be applied reasonably.Based on the complementary of the general terms in tort liability,the principle of fault liability shall be applicable to the conditions when pedestrians and non-motor vehicle assume liability for compensation to motor vehicle,the way theory and security theory should be flexibly used in the fault judgment.We shall comply with the principle of "performers the risk burden" of the motor vehicle party,tend to distribute more liabilities to the non-motor vehicles and pedestrians.Meantime,when we apply the principle of offsetting negligence,should consider the principle of "appropriate less compensation" according to the degree of fault.If either party fails to prove the fault degree of the non-motor vehicle or pedestrian,the non-motor vehicle or pedestrian shall not be liable for compensation.