Study On The Judicial Application Of The Rule Of "Same Ride With Good Intentions" In The Civil Code

Mutual help and friendliness are important elements of the core socialist concept,and the act of sharing a car out of goodwill is an important manifestation of the spirit of mutual help and helpfulness,and is therefore advocated in our society today.In everyday life,it is very common for people to ride together with good intentions,but there are also cases of damage resulting from traffic accidents caused by people riding together with good intentions.Prior to the enactment of the Civil Code,there was no provision for carpooling in China’s laws,and in judicial practice,the courts differed in their decisions on carpooling cases,resulting in the phenomenon of "different judgments for different types of cases".Article 172 of the Civil Code provides for the first time for carpooling with good intentions,and also provides for the liability for damages caused to the rider by carpooling with good intentions,but because the current provisions are not perfect,how to use the standard in specific cases,and how to judge "carpooling with good intentions" and the important features of carpooling with good intentions However,as the current provisions are not yet perfect,there is still a need to resolve the more common problems in judicial practice,such as how to use the standard in specific cases,and how to determine the "gratuitousness" and the important features of the goodwill carpool.After defining the basic concept,characteristics and legal nature of the same ride with good intentions,this paper takes the problems existing in the judicial judgment as the starting point,combs the judgment cases,and intends to further explore the application of the relevant rules of the same ride with good intentions by using the methods of literature reading,combination of theoretical and practical analysis,case analysis and so on,It mainly studies how to identify the "intention and gross negligence" of the well intentioned person,and what impact it has on the assumption of the tort liability of the well intentioned person.In the road traffic safety law,the traffic accident liability is divided into full liability,primary liability,equal liability,secondary liability and no liability according to the role of the actions of both parties to the accident on the traffic accident and the severity of the fault,The author believes that in judicial practice,the "full responsibility" in traffic accidents can not be simply "Main responsibility" is equivalent to the "intentional or gross negligence" of the well intentioned person in the civil code,but it should judge whether the well intentioned person constitutes "intentional or gross negligence" in the case of damage caused by the good intentioned person according to the specific situation of the case,the subjective psychological state and objective situation of the well intentioned person,so as to form a unified standard in the judicial judgment and improve the relevant provisions.