The Burden Of Compensation Liabilities Of The None Responsibility Of Passenger And Driver In Traffic Accident

If the identification of the traffic accident states that the driver and passenger were no faults neither without out any legal responsibility for the accident, how the damages or injures be burden? In judicial practices, there are following three suggestions: one is that the auto has no fault as to take the 10% burden of compensation according to the Article 76 of the Road Safety Law of China; two is that the victim without fault and the part of action take the burden based on the actual matters according to the Article 24 of the Torts Las of China as there is no certain clause to handle the no faults of both driver and passenger; three is that the identification is only the evidence because of the difference between the faults and responsibility identified and the faults and responsibility in compensation and the two sides of faults should be re-checked. So the three points shows the disputes and arguments about the issue which also reflects the ambiguous concept about the liability of traffic accident, the compensation liability of traffic accident and so on. Therefore, this paper tries to clear up the differences of the faults in the administrative management and the civil torts to make the correct decision through the recalling of the identification and the comparisons between the two liabilities and the two faults.So this paper is divided into five parts. Part one is to introduce a real case of traffic accident and to elaborate the details in the identification and the three points of the discussion by the collective court.Part two is focuses on the qualities and the characters of the identification as evidence. By the analysis of the evidence values of the identification in lawsuit, the qualities and the defects of the identification in the academia, the author considers that this identification should not be simply concluded as a kind of evidence which must be"dissected"from its context: the basic information of the parts and autos should be the documental evidence; the records of the accident spot should be the investigated and checked records; the reasons of accident should be the identified conclusion and the classification of the accidental liabilities should only be referenced as the opinion of the administrative authority but not the evidence.Part three is to analyze the differences of the accidental liability and the compensation liability. By the demonstration of the legal qualities, the legal bases, the imputations and the subjects, the former indentified as non-liability does not equal to the conclusion of no compensation liability.Part four is mainly to resolve the problem of what standard could be used to classify the compensation liabilities as the identification does not adopted. The paper states that this situation should be judged by the fault standard of the civil torts with the differences of the two faults through the comparison of the two faults and the discussion of the judgment of the part's tort.Part five is the legal application of the case. By the analysis above, the author concludes that the court should check the identification of accident in order to adopt is as the no opposite evidences of the whole process; and takes the identified conclusion as the reason analysis and the liabilities classification as the opinion of the administrative authority but not the rules of the compensation liabilities of accident. Under the situation of the no liabilities of both driver and passenger, the judges should find out the faults of two sides based on the real matters then re-burden the liabilities of two parts and make the correct decision.