Judicial Definition Of Reasonable Limit Of Security Obligation

With the development of economy and the progress of society,the infringement cases of violating the security obligation become more and more frequent.But whether the tort liability law article 37 or "consumer rights and interests protects a law" article 18 and article 6"judicial interpretation on compensation for personal injury" judicial interpretation of the provisions of the security obligation is only made a summary,specific what is the security obligation and how to define the obligor in the judicial practice is a violation of the security obligation,the law and judicial interpretation,there is no specific instructions.The first part of this paper is the introduction.The development of economy and culture in modern society leads to more and more infringement cases that fail to fulfill security obligations.However,due to the imperfection of laws and regulations,it is difficult for judges to define the reasonable limit of security obligations in handling such cases,which leads to difficulties in the trial of cases.The second part of this paper starts from the case analysis,first introduces the case and the judgment result of two relatively similar cases,then analyzes the two cases,studies the similarities and differences of the two cases,and makes a comparative analysis of how the judge defines the reasonable limit of security obligation in the judgment of the two cases.Then it points out that cases of security obligation occur frequently and judges encounter difficulties in judging their reasonable limits,which highlights the problems to be studied in this paper.The third part is the legal analysis of the reasonable limit of security obligation.This part firstly analyzes the necessity of defining the reasonable limit of security obligation,and points out that defining the reasonable limit of security obligation is the embodiment of fairness principle,the requirement of utilitarian principle,and the proper meaning of the principle of balance of interests.Then,a comparative study on the definition of the reasonable limit of security obligation is carried out to compare the legislation situation of other countries in Anglo-American law system and continental law system,introduce the current legislation situation and judicial practice in China,and make a comparative analysis of the necessity of determining the reasonable limit definition standard.Finally,the author makes a brief analysis of the reasonable limit of the security obligation,and points out that the security obligation should be limited from the following aspects:the source of the security obligation,the subject of the obligation and the responsibility.The fourth part of this paper introduces the principles and general standards that should be followed in defining the reasonable limit of security obligation.That is to say,the reasonable limit of security obligation should follow the principles of fairness,fault liability,possibility of expectation and distinction.Then through the civil law system and the Anglo-American law system theory research,compares our country judicatory practice,points out that defines the safe safeguard duty reasonable limit several standards,and has made own ponder to these several standards.The fifth part is the author's suggestion.Entire article through the analysis of the security obligation reasonable limit,finally came to the conclusion that to increase the applicable standard of judgment,kindhearted administrator to comprehensive applicable legal standards,industry standards,software and hardware standards,expand special standards apply,finally,from the source of the obligation of security obligations,obligation and responsibility of security obligation to limit,in order to a more clear definition of security obligation reasonable limit.The sixth part is the conclusion,summarizing the whole text,putting forward the significance of defining the reasonable limit of security obligation,and reaffirming the principle and standard of definition.