Compulsory Traffic Accident Liability Insurance

Traffic accident is the crude byproduct of the motor industry. In order to protect the victims of traffic accidents, many countries and areas have carried out the system of the motor traffic accident liability compulsory insurance. The Road Traffic Safety Law of China which was enforced in 2004 stipulates that our country practices the motor traffic accident liability compulsory insurance system. The Motor Traffic Accident Liability Compulsory Insurance Ordinance, which was based on The Road Traffic Safety Law and Insurance Law, has been adopted and put into force on July 1st ,2006.For the special social purpose of this kind of insurance, the third party can enjoy its interests set by the contract, although it is not the direct party of the insurance contract. This is a breakthrough in the contract relative theory. As the aim of this kind of insurance is to protect the victims of the traffic accident, the victims who are not responsible for the occurring of the accident should be protected equally. The definition of the third party in The Motor Traffic Accident Liability Compulsory Insurance Ordinance is not proper, which can not protect the victims effectively. The third party should cover passengers, the holder and the insurant who were not controlling the motor when the accident happened, and their family members.Most countries and areas have provided the third party's right of direct claim, but the law of our country is not clear on this occasion. It is unfavorable to protect the interests of the victims in practice. So China should provide the third party the direct claim right definitely. The claim right of the third party is endowed by law. The insurer should not apply the terms, which are supposed to be applied to the insured, to the third party. The insurer should pay the insurant amount to the third party directly unless the insured has paid it. If the motor holder had insured the commercial third party liability insurance or the victims own personal insurance or industrial accident insurance, several claims will be occurred in these cases. When there were compulsory and commercial third party liability insurances, the third party should first ask the compulsory third party liability insurance insurer for compensation, and ask the commercial third party liability insurance insurer for the left. When there were both compulsory third party liability insurance and personal insurance, the third party can ask both insurers for personal damage compensation, but only can ask one insurer for the property damage compensation, and the compulsory insurer should take the final burden. When there were compulsory third party liability insurance and industrial accident insurance, the third party can ask both insurers for double compensation.The contents the insurer should compensate the third party are different from those the insured should. If the victims choose to ask the insured for compensation, the insured should pay the amount according to the tort law, if the victims choose to ask the insurer for compensation, the insurer should pay according the regulation of the motor traffic accident liability compulsory insurance law. There is room for improvement for the regulations of our country's law in this field. Firstly, it compels too much to cover property damage which should be deleted; secondly, the distribution of the liability limitation is unreasonable, the amount of medical treatment expense limitation should be raised.Because the no-fault liability doctrine is adopted in our country, the only excuse the insured can employ to withstand its fault is the victim's intention. The third party's claim right is endowed by law, not shifted from the insurant so the insurer cannot withstand the third party with the excuse against the insured. At the same time, the insurer's interest also should be protected. The rule of set-off negligence also can be put into use in this kind of insurance which adopts the no-fault liability doctrine. In practice we should pay attention to the principle of "assumption of liability lies in the part of advantages", the set-off negligence is only limited to compensation of spirit suffering living subsidy and property damage, the children, the handicapped and the old should be in particular consideration.