The Study On The Scope Of Security Obligator

The security obligation is a duty that the civil subject, includingnatural person, legal person and unincorporated organization, should takepositive measures to safeguard other party's personal and propertysecurity in specific field of operation and other social activities accordingto the law. The obligor is the undertaker of security obligation. Theobligor should take compensation responsibility if the obligations fail tobe fulfilled, consequently causing any damage to the personal or propertyrights of other party. The scope of security obligator is not invariable butexpansible with the social development. The legal rules about securityobligation exist dispersedly in our country. There are some defects, suchas the legal rules being not complete and systematic; the judicature beingnot maneuverable and so on. The legal theoretical foundations of thesecurity obligation are mainly the following several respects: theory ofdanger control, theory of relationship of trust, theory of profit, theory ofsaving the social total cost and equal idea of civil law essence. There are "forseeability", "proximity", "confidence", "fairness" as general criterionto estimate whether the duty exists or not. The obligator can be classifiedas providing safety on equipment and on service, and preventing damagescaused by the third Party. The security obligator mainly include thefollowing several respects: the obligator of fixed business location; theobligator of employment relationship; the obligator of campus; theobligator of real estate management; the obligator of assembly and sportsactivities; the obligator of communications and transportation and so on.In order to the accurate definition of security obligator, the author holdsthe view that the security obligation should be deemed to be tort liability;the security obligation should be brought into the legal system of tort law;and a pattern of combination of general and categorized clause should beestablished in the future legal system of tort law. The author holds theview that it is available to vest the right of discretion to bench, toestablish the example of judgments, and to intensify the function of thejudicial interpretations in the administration of justice.