Research On Tort Liability Of Recipient Violating Act Obligation

In rescue activities,cases in which the rescuer suffers personal injury due to the recipient’s violation of the obligation to act shall be supplemented by the application of the tort compensation rules,supplemented by the application of the beneficiary’s appropriate compensation rules.However,in such cases,since the recipient’s tortious acts are often negative omissions,the application of the tort compensation rule inevitably leads to a dilemma of attribution,which is why some have begun to advocate the direct application of the appropriate compensation rule.In such cases,the applicable rule of appropriate compensation for beneficiaries is based on the no-cause management clause and the righteous courage clause,although the application of these two clauses can avoid the difficulty of determining tort liability for omission and facilitate the resolution of the case,but at the same time,the law will not be able to make a reasonable evaluation of the improper behavior of the aided person,and can only rely too much on moral condemnation of it,such a judgment is neither convincing nor can it give the rescuer sufficient relief.There are three main difficulties faced by the application of tort law: first,it is difficult to define the recipient’s obligation to act,second,it is difficult to determine whether the aided person has indeed violated the obligation to act,and third,it is difficult to clarify the form of liability borne by the aided.In order to get out of these dilemmas,the concept of partner as an obligation could first be introduced into the attribution process in such cases.The recipient and the rescuer in the rescue relationship have the same meaning,at least at the level of mutual defense against danger,so that the two can be regarded as partners in common defense against danger,and each other is obligated.On this basis,this obligation can be further refined into the obligation of prior care,the obligation to rescue in the event and the obligation to notify afterwards,so that the problem of defining it as an obligation can be solved.Secondly,the standard of adequate performance is adopted as a reference to determine whether the aided person has violated the obligation from an objective perspective,and when the aided person fails to perform or performs insufficiently,he should bear tort liability,otherwise he should bear the responsibility for appropriate compensation.Finally,starting from the majority tort liability system,based on the actual situation of the case,select the tort liability form corresponding to the infringement of the aided person to match it,so as to reasonably allocate liability between the direct infringer and the aided person and ensure that the rescuer receives sufficient relief.In the Jiang Ge case,defendant Liu Nuanxi’s omission violated her obligation as a partner,and her direct infringement with Chen Shifeng constituted a competing tort and should bear supplementary liability for infringement.