>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
No.4 of Four Model Cases Published by the Supreme People's Court: Zeng Mingqing v. Peng Youhong and Ping An Property & Casualty Insurance Company of China,Ltd. Sichuan Shudu Branch (case of disputes over liability for a traffic accident of motor vehicles)
最高法发布四起侵权纠纷典型案例:曾明清诉彭友洪、中国平安财产保险股份有限公司成都市蜀都支公司机动车交通事故责任纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

No.4 of Four Model Cases Published by the Supreme People's Court: Zeng Mingqing v. Peng Youhong and Ping An Property & Casualty Insurance Company of China,Ltd. Sichuan Shudu Branch (case of disputes over liability for a traffic accident of motor vehicles)
(case of disputes over liability for a traffic accident of motor vehicles)
最高法发布四起侵权纠纷典型案例:曾明清诉彭友洪、中国平安财产保险股份有限公司成都市蜀都支公司机动车交通事故责任纠纷案
[Key Terms]
hit and run ; joint and several liability ; full liability for satisfaction
[核心术语]
肇事逃逸;连带责任;全部清偿责任
[Disputed Issues]
Where a victim in a traffic accident dies after being run over by more than one motor vehicle, if all the perpetrators except the last one hit and run, should the last perpetrator be held solely liable therefor?
[争议焦点]
交通事故受害人遭多辆车先后碾压后死亡,除最后一名肇事者外,其他肇事者均逃逸的情况下,是否应由最后一名肇事者承担全部责任?
[Case Summary]
A victim in a traffic accident dies after being run over by more than one motor vehicle but it is difficult to determine which perpetrator's act directly causes the death of the victim. In other words each perpetrator's act has a possibility of depriving the victim of life. Under the provisions of Article 11 of the Tort Liability Law where two or more persons commit torts respectively...
[案例要旨]
交通事故受害人遭多辆车先后碾压后死亡无法确定具体是哪一名肇事者的碾压行为直接导致了受害人的死亡即每一名肇事者的碾压行为均有可能导致受害人死亡结果的发生。根据《侵权责任法》第十一条规定“二人以上分别实施侵权行为造成同一损害每个人的侵权行为都足以造成全部损害的...
No.4 of Four Model Cases Published by the Supreme People's Court: Zeng Mingqing v. Peng Youhong and Chengdu City Shudu Branch of China Ping An Property Insurance Co., Ltd. (Case of Dispute over Traffic Accident Liability of Motor Vehicles) 最高法发布四起侵权纠纷典型案例:曾明清诉彭友洪、中国平安财产保险股份有限公司成都市蜀都支公司机动车交通事故责任纠纷案
I. Basic Facts 一、基本事实
Around 19:00 on October 10, 2011, after a truck with an unknown plate driven by an unknown driver hit Zeng who crossed the street, the unknown driver escaped; afterwards, a motor vehicle with an unknown plate driven by another unknown driver crushed Zeng who fell to the ground and then the unknown driver also ran away. Around 19:05, when Peng Youhong drove his small car (plate: Chuan A211R9) (to which he has purchased the compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and the third-party liability insurance with the irrespective deductible quota of 200,000 yuan) passing the accident section, due to failure of braking in time, the car crushed over the body of Zeng who fell down to ground in the middle of the road (according to Peng Youhong, the crush position was Zeng's chest), and Peng Youhong immediately stopped the car and called the police. On 19:21, medical care personnel arrived at the scene and upon rescue on the scene, it was determined that Zeng had no vital signs. A death certificate was issued, on which it was indicated that Zeng died on 19:34. The traffic police department also inspected and took pictures of the scene, and prepared the scene drawing. It was shown in the aforesaid materials that it was an urban road, which had bidirectional eight lanes and was separated by double full lines in the center; there was no pedestrian crossing near the accident scene; and the bloodstain, the place where Zeng fell to the ground, and the vehicle (Chuan A211R9) were all located in the lane close to the double lines and there was no drag mark around. On October 19, the Sichuan Genegle Forensic Expertise House issued a Report on DNA Identification, with the identification opinions that “The bloodstain sample took from the lower part of the front bumper and the wheel of the car (Chuan A211R9) belonged to Zeng.” On October 26, the Material Evidence Verification House of the Chengdu Public Security Bureau issued a Report on Postmortem Examination, which specified the examination opinions that “As deduced, Zeng died of compound injuries of brain, chest and stomach. It was proposed that an autopsy should be conducted to specify the means resulting in the death.” However, upon consultation between Peng Youhong and Zeng's relatives, the autopsy was not conducted. On November 14, 2011, the traffic police department issued a Written Conclusion on the Road Traffic Accident and determined that unknown drivers should all assume full liabilities of the accident on the ground that such unknown drivers ran away after the accident occurred. It was also specified in the Written Conclusion on the Road Traffic Accident that: Peng Youhong failed to ensure safety and violated the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 22 of the Road Traffic Safety Law; and since it failed to confirm whether Zeng's death was caused by the hit of the car (Chuan A211R9), the liabilities of Peng Youhong failed to determined on the basis of the role of Peng Youhong's act in the traffic accident and the severity of Peng Youhong's fault. Owing to failure to find the runaway vehicles, Zeng Mingqing, father of Zeng and sole heir of Zeng, instituted a lawsuit in the court and requested the court to order that Peng Youhong and Shudu Branch of Ping An Property Insurance should pay a total of 424,576.50 yuan for various losses caused by Zeng's death.
......
 2011年10月10日19时左右,未知名驾驶人驾驶未知号牌货车与横穿马路的曾**相撞后逃逸;后有未知名驾驶人驾驶未知号牌机动车碾压倒地的曾**后亦逃逸。19时05分许,彭友洪驾驶自有的川A211R9号小型轿车(该车在平安财保蜀都支公司投保了交强险和不计免赔限额为20万元的商业三者险)途经事发路段时,由于刹车不及,从已倒在道路中间的曾**身上碾压过去(其自述碾压部位为曾**胸部),随即停车报警。19时21分,医护人员到场,经现场抢救,确定曾**已无生命体征,出具了死亡证明书,载明曾**死亡时间为19时34分。交警部门亦对现场进行了勘验、拍照,并制作了现场图,上述材料显示:道路基本情况为城市道路,双向8车道,道路中心由双实线分隔,事故现场附近无人行横道,路上血迹、曾**倒地位置、川A211R9号车辆均位于靠近双实线的车道内,周围无拖拉痕迹。同月19日,四川基因格司法鉴定所出具《DNA鉴定报告》,鉴定意见为:川A211R9轿车前保险杠下部和轮胎上提取的血痕样本属于曾**。同月26日,成都市公安局物证鉴定所出具《尸检报告》,载明检验意见为:“推断曾**的死因为颅脑、胸腹部复合性损伤致死亡,建议进行尸体解剖明确致死方式。”但经彭友洪与曾**亲属协商,未进行尸体解剖。2011年11月14日,交警部门出具《道路交通事故认定书》,以未知名驾驶人肇事后逃逸为由,确定未知名驾驶人均承担事故的全部责任。该《道路交通事故认定书》还载明:彭友洪驾车未确保安全,违反了《道路交通安全法》第二十二条第一款的规定;由于无法证实曾**死亡是否因与川A211R9号车相撞所致,故不能根据当事人的行为对发生交通事故所起的作用及过错的严重程度确定当事人的责任。由于未找到逃逸车辆,曾**之父曾明清(系曾**的唯一继承人)向法院起诉,请求判令彭友洪、平安财保蜀都支公司赔偿因曾**死亡造成的各项损失合计424 576.50元。
......

Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥200.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese