Research On The Supervisory Negligence

Supervision negligence theory since the1960s in Japan, has been a high degreeof attention of the criminal theorists and the criminal justice practitioners. However,supervision fault itself with particularity, so there is a lot of controversy in theory andpractice. This paper studies focus on the supervision of negligence basic theory andbasic use,and the text is divided into four parts:The first part of the essay is interpreting the theme. First, through broaderunderstanding and narrow the supervisory negligence Discrimination, establishedunderstanding the stance narrow understanding of this article and highlight thecharacteristics of indirect supervision negligence. Departure from the establishedconcept, this Yupo supervision negligence identified difficulties and theoreticalresearch in the judicial practice in the plight of two questions, the basic idea of theproposed use of supervision and negligence theory.The second part of the metatheory judge supervisory negligence. Supervisorynegligence is behavior in the criminal law sense, from a behavioral point of view,including the acts and omissions of its behavior in two forms. In terms ofresponsibility, supervision and negligence in the level and normative level ofpsychological factors has blame.The third part is a defined the supervisory negligence duty of care. The duty ofcare in supervision negligence is supposed the main identity has corresponding,whether it has a duty of care to determine whether the subject in the supervision of theprosecution of negligence liability within the scope of. Duty of care exists to overseethe relationship between the premise and its specific source of statutory obligations,duties and business obligations can be divided into three aspects of the first actsobligations caused.The fourth section discusses the results foreseen the possibility of avoidableresult the possibility of judgment. Supervisor foresee judgment, should adhere to thestandards of the typed compromise said. The supervisor should have foreseen that the object in three aspects, including its oversight behavior, caused by the supervisor’sbehavior by monitoring behavior, harm results. The foreseeable requirements shouldgenerally be required to achieve apprehensive ang "Apprehensive flu" standardapplicable in exceptional circumstances specific foresee. Supervisor to avoid withpossible results should be allowed to reduce the risk of evading the obligationsrequired results. Supervisor supervisee relationship of trust makes the results foreseenand avoided the possibility of lower.So the "Trust principles" can exclude theapplication of the supervisor’s negligence, but applicable to them should be limited.