Research On The Reasonable Limit Of Security Obligation Of Public Places

The establishment of China’s security obligation system dates from the Interpretation of The Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law to the Trial of Personal Injury Compensation Cases(hereinafter referred to as the Interpretation)in 2003.In the later Tort Liability Law and the present Civil Code,the legislation of security obligation has been inherited and restructured to varying degrees.Article 6 of the Interpretation uses the word "reasonable scope" to limit the scope of security obligations,while article 37 of the Tort Liability Law removes the qualifier "reasonable scope".Article 1198 of the Current Civil Code also basically follows the expression of Article 37 of the Tort Liability Law.It is not difficult to see that this is the implementation of the legislative idea of "taking the continental law system as the body,using the Common law system and extensively absorbing judicial experience",and also reflects the difficulty of defining the reasonable limit of security obligations in legislation at present.The vacancy of legislation originates from the deficiency of theory and also causes the problems in practice.In theory,the security obligation has some shortcomings such as unclear nature,fuzzy reasonable limit and mixed recognition standard of obligation limit.In practice,there are problems such as inconsistency in the standards of judges and abuse of security obligations in practice.The reasons for the above theoretical problems lie in the deviation of the understanding of "reasonable limit" in law and the absence of systematic scientific thinking in the construction of reasonable limit standard.In addition,because there is no standard tort mode,the weight of fact judgment in the determination of causality is reduced,which leads to excessive reliance on the judge’s value measurement,namely the discretion.At the same time,the increasingly extensive expansion of security obligations,the wide gap between the two sides of the case on whether reasonable or not,and excessive reliance on the discretion of judges also lead to the emergence of problems in practice.In this regard,this paper aims to discuss the two criteria of reasonable limit of security obligation: fact judgment criterion and value measurement factor.In addition,in order to enhance the operability of this standard,two auxiliary ways of limit definition are proposed,namely,the definition of nature and the classification of security obligation,in order to provide new thoughts and attempts for the research on the reasonable limit of security obligation in public places.