一、Introduction
No-fault liability, fault, responsibility, fairness responsibilities belong to the principles of tort law Imputation research areas. Tort law principles of attribution, which is to determine the person's civil liability for violations of the basis and criteria, is consistent among the entire tort law, and commander of all tort law norms play a role in the legislative guidelines, is the judiciary dealing with infringement disputes the basic principles to be followed.
However, because of the principle of liability without fault to understand the concept of bias and traditional haunt, making it the progress of each step must be accompanied by a raging controversy. But no matter in the world or in our country, its scope of application more widely, the new "Contract Law" enacted more to make a conclusion to this issue. Because of this, our exploration and study is meaningful.
二、The concept of the principle of no-fault liability
The principle of liability without fault, also known as no-fault liability principle means that there is no fault of the damage caused by others, depending on the law and the damage caused by the reasons for the person concerned the principle of attribution of civil liability. The application of this principle, not primarily the fault of the person under the act, but on the fact that the objective existence of the damage, according to the activities of the perpetrator and the management of the dangerous nature of people or things with the consequences of the damage caused by the causal relationship required by law with special emphasis on the responsibility. Therefore, the doctrine is also known as the principle of liability without fault of objective responsibility or risk liability, Anglo-American law known as strict liability.
Civil Law Article 106, paragraph 3, provides: "No fault, but the law should bear responsibility, it shall bear civil liability." This is our civil law on the recognition of the principle of liability without fault. No-fault liability principle applies to the law there are special provisions, the specific scope of application of Article 121 of Civil Law, Article 122, section 123, Article 124, Article 125, paragraph No. 126, p. 127, p. 133 provided in Article violations. In addition, our separate regulations applicable to the principle of liability without fault have been defined, such as the Health Law Article 39, paragraph 40; the Drug Administration Law section 56; Veterinary Drugs Control Act section 47; Environmental Protection Act, section 23; water Pollution Control Act Article 41, Article 42 and so on.
三、No-fault liability composition of elements
⒈ damage to the objective existence of the facts.
2. Have a legal provision expressly provided, can not constitute a no-fault liability; the same time, there is no statutory exemptions can not be exemption.
⒊ special tort and damage a causal relationship between the facts.
⒋ no fault of the perpetrator. Accountability refers to the act without regard to whether a fault in the identification of the responsible persons when the act without the victim to give evidence with the fault of the perpetrator need not provide evidence there was no fault of their own, even though there is no fault of their own to provide the evidence should bear the责任.
四、The legal characteristics of no-fault liability
(A), the statutory scope of application: no-fault liability principle must be applied within the scope of the law and can not expand or reduce its scope of application. Civil Code provisions apply to a typical case of no-fault liability are: defective products, infringement, violations of high-risk operations, environmental pollution violations, the ground caused by violations of construction, breeding of animals caused by violations of state organs of staff performing their duties in the violations, no civil capacity or limit the capacity for civil conduct violations, corporate violations of staff, because buildings and other objects to cause harm caused by violations of the compensation cases.
(B), the statutory exemptions: for no-fault liability of the special conditions of the exemption from tort law, however, only the specific acts of invasion of the statutory exemptions are not identical.
1, organ or its staff in performing their duties violations. Civil Law Article 121 stipulates: "State organs, or staff of state organs in performing their duties, the violation of citizens, legal persons and damage the legitimate rights and interests, it shall bear civil liability." Implement the Supreme People's views of Civil Law Article 152 of this made a further clear: "National authorities should bear the public responsibility." responsibility for such infringement in foreign countries in many cases the legislation referred to as "public tort liability." ④ characterized as follows: the perpetrators of violations of State organs or their staff; infringement Department of State organs or their staff in performing their duties in the event; violations against the state authorities or by its staff perform their duties should be the duty of care. State organs or their staff carry out their duties to cause harm to tort liability, applies to no-fault principle of attribution, the victim only need to adduce evidence to prove the existence of violations and damage to the facts and the causal relationship between the two, but the state authorities can not prove that they have Disclaimer constitutes the subject of tort liability. In particular should be noted that the existing law on the state organs and state organs of tort liability, in addition to General Civil Code section 121, there is also the provisions of Article 67 of the Administrative Procedure Law and the State Compensation Law Article 2. In the application of the principles to be followed are: to give priority to the state compensation law applicable to the provisions of Article 2; if the State Compensation Law does not apply the provisions of Article 2, and then consider the application of the provisions of Article 67 of the Administrative Procedure Law; if Article 67 of Administrative Litigation could not be applied in order to apply the provisions of Article 121 of Civil Law.
2, incapacity or limited capacity for civil conduct violations. No capacity for civil conduct capacity for civil conduct or restrictions on people who, though does not have full civil capacity, but their implementation of the damage caused by the behavior of others also constitutes infringement. Civil law countries such violations were defined as specific violations, ⑤ It features: the perpetrators of violations is no capacity for civil conduct or restrictions on capacity for civil conduct; infringement is no capacity for civil conduct or restrictions on civil capacity of people for the independence of the damage caused by human behavior; tort for the wrongful act objectively. Against non-capacity for civil conduct or restrictions on capacity for civil conduct to cause damage to the violations by its legal representative (guardian) assume vicarious liability, applies to the principle of liability without fault. However, the vertical, such as legal representatives to prove that dredging was not negligent of their guardianship duties, or has done considerable duty of care, but still could not avoid the damage of the situation, take full responsibility for its unfair. To this end, Civil Law Article 133, paragraph 1, provides that: "guardians responsibility to make a guardianship can relieve him of civil liability."
3, corporate staff violations. Corporation as a social organization, their behavior can not be specific. It is foreign to conduct business activities through a legal entity representative or agent to complete, which is manifested mainly corporate legal representative and other staff functions of behavior. ⑥ Its characteristics are: acts of infringement were legal staff; infringement legal staff of the Department for the performance of their duty; violations shall be unlawful. Corporate staff to cause damage to the violations by the corporate commitment to civil liability, commonly known as "corporate tort liability." On accountability, this is also a tort for the acts of the vicarious liability of others. In the imputation principle, should be applied to no-fault principle, that as long as the corporate staff functions act to cause damage, regardless of whether the subjective legal fault, shall be made by corporate liability.
五、No-fault liability and general fault liability, mixed-fault liability, to presume a distinction between fault liability
First of all, should be no-fault liability and the general distinction between fault liability. Are many kinds of special infringement, but not all are applicable to the particular infringing the principle of liability without fault. Such as the State organs and their staff positions infringement. Constitution, Article 41, paragraph 3, Civil Law section 121, the State Compensation Law, the provisions of Article 2 are made, although the three sentences in the wording is not exactly the same, but each is a uniform, not contradictory.
Secondly, there will be no-fault liability and the distinction between mixed-fault liability. Hybrid fault refers to the occurrence of damage, the perpetrators and the victims are innocent. Civil Law Article 131 provides that: "the victim for the occurrence of the damage at fault, you can reduce the person's civil liability for infringement." This provision is Article 106 of the Act, paragraph 2, to add, the same fault liability in general terms, reflecting must assume the responsibility of the fault principle.
Again, there will be no-fault liability and the presumption of fault liability to be distinguished. Presumption of fault, the burden of proof is reversed in the case, if the perpetrators could not adduce evidence to prove their behavior and the damage there is no causal relationship between the results and there is no fault, then he has a presumption of fault, and thus bear the responsibility for fault. Such as "Supreme People's Court on a number of provisions of Civil Evidence," Article IV, paragraph (d) provides: "buildings or other facilities, and building on the shelving material, suspender collapse, falling, falling to cause damage to the infringement litigation, by the owner or manager of the burden of proof for its no-fault. "and so provided that if the perpetrator does not adduce evidence to prove their own no-fault, then the presumption of fault by the behavior of actors who assume the responsibility for fault. Also similar to medical malpractice and other damages. No-fault liability without regard to whether the fault of the perpetrator, so long as exemptions can not be fixed by the perpetrator accountable. No-fault liability and fault liability phase of the presumption of fault is very similar, in particular there are special tort caused when the two mixed together, the articles of law (for all Civil Code section between 121-127) more confusing. Thus, in the application must be on the wording of the Act provides in-depth analysis of the scrutiny, can only correct understanding of the legislative intent to distinguish between the two.
六、Conclusion
In short, no-fault liability principle must be expressly provided in the law to apply in case, can not be deflected by the judge will randomly expand or narrow their scope of application. In particular, it should be noted that, should no-fault liability and general fault liability, mixed-fault liability, to presume a distinction between the right-fault liability, so that "penalty when their responsibility." Only then can we truly realize the "facts, the law as the criterion," the judicial principles, and truly fair and just legal value targets.
