Security Obligations Study

With the development of economics, social activities have become more complicated. Security problem has become increasingly important. However, in our national legal system, security issues have not been given inadequate emphasis. The theory of the duty of safety protection is imported from Germany and theoretical research for this problem started fairly late in our country. Along with the increase of judicial legal precedent, the People's Supreme Court promulgated "Explanation about Certain Legal Questions On Personal Damage compensate Cases"(to hereafter refer to as Explanation) in December 4,2003. The Explanation has made the stipulation which was the first provision about the safety control duty. Tort Law of the People's Republic Of China have been into force on July 1,2010. On the base of article 6 Explanation, the article 37 of the law made some adjustments and changes about the provision of duty of safety protection. Duty of safety protection's legal status has been confirmed. However, on academic level, studies are not deep enough to get relatively uniform theories. And on legislative level, regulations on it lack systematism, rationality and feasibility. The new tort law remains contain many disputes. Theorists cannot achieve a mutual recognition to the concept of safety control duty, the legal basis, So it is necessary to discuss the question further.The text mainly discusses the safeguard obligation from perspective of article 37 of new tort law. This text is divided into three chapters. The chapter one discusses the development of the safety insurance duty and present legislation in our country. The security obligation can be traced back to ancient Roman. The safety insurance duty is to adapt realistic need, be founded on the basis of the social development degree. The two big legal systems also have the similar stipulation. And the theory research in China has become more mature. The chapter two discusses its legal basis and its basic theory.The legal basis of the safety insurance duty has played as a lever to balance benefits and to assign rights. The basic theory of safety insurance includes the nature, the concrete content as well as the nature of the legal liability responsibility if there is a violation, principle of the responsibility, and the responsibility of the third human when he or she abuse the duty, etc.. However, theory always serves the practice. So in the last part, we should pay attention to the case in judicial practice. I summarize some practical problems and try to make several suggestions about it. For example, when the third person involved, according to the new tort law, the person who violates his safe duty will undertake corresponding supplementary liability. However, if his fault degree is serious enough to be the main reason of the infringement, that his liability is supplementary I think is not reasonable. Proposing new problems like this are innovation of my text. In the text I use comparative and empirical analysis methods and I hope I can do some contribution to promote the theory of the safeguard obligation.