| The people’s Republic of China tort liability law enacted in July1,2010(Hereinafter referred to as the tort liability law) distinguished the joint act of tortand multiple persons’ torts without joint intention by joint implementation andrespective implementation.And there are also the provisions of the two modes ofresponsibilities for multiple persons’ torts without joint intention. That is when thetortfeasors without joint intention commit a tort respectively,and every tort issufficient to cause the damage, the responsible persons shall bear joint and severalliability.In addition,when the tortfeasors without joint intention commit a tortrespectively,and the combination of torts caused the damage,the responsible personsshall assume duty by shares.The law caused a fierce debate over the theory circle andpractice circle,which caused scholars’ debate on the joint act of tort and the multiplepersons’ torts without joint intention.The debate mainly has three points,one is thedifferent understanding of what is the meaning of joint in the joint act of tort,so thatthere are different kinds of division of several tort.The second dispute is the multiplepersons’ torts without joint intention is a kind of independent tort or belongs to thejoint act of tort.The third debate is the responsible persons of the multiple persons’torts without joint intention shall bear which kind of responsibility.This article is divided into three parts,and the author chose a case that damagecaused by building drop,to analyze.In the first part,the basic situation of the case areintroduced,then summarized the different views of both the plaintiff and thedefendant.Secondly,the author described the decisions and reasons of trial courts at alllevels briefly.The last is to clear the focus of controversy in this case.The second partis the analysis of the two focus of controversy in this case.The first issue is to confirmthe person liable for the case,and it relates to the tort liability of the buildings fallinginjury.This paper analyzes the constitutive elements of the tort liability and defenses,it was concluded that the building owner B technology company should bear theresponsibility for compensation.The determination of the person liable also relates tothe omission.In this paper, according to the elements of tortious liability ofomission,the C company should assume responsibility for the analysis,the conclusionis C company should bear the responsibility for compensation.The second issue is thedivision of the responsibilities in this case.Before the confirmation of responsibility,we have to determine what kind of tort liability between the twocompanies.In this paper,according to the constitutive elements of multiple persons’torts without joint intention,the two responsible companies constitute the multiplepersons’ torts without joint intention.Then,the author should divide the tworesponsible companies’ responsibilities based on the relevant provisions of the ‘tortliability act’.Finally,this article describes some triggered thinking by this case in thethird part.The main points of view in this paper:Tort liability act stipulates that the eighth‘common’ should adopt the theory of subjective fault, including common intention,and joint negligence.When the tortfeasors without joint intention commit a tortrespectively,and every tort is sufficient to cause the damage, the responsible personshall bear joint and several liability.And when the tortfeasors without joint intentioncommit a tort respectively,and the combination of torts caused the damage,theresponsible persons shall assume duty by shares.In the latter case,the division ofresponsibilities according to the degree of fault or cause force standard.When theabove two standards are not sure, take the average responsibility. |
