道路交通安全事故归责原则研究

【作者】 吴群华；

【导师】 沈秋明；

【作者基本信息】 上海海事大学 ， 民商法学， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 改革开放近30年,机动车给中国的经济带来了高速发展,机动车事故受害人的保护问题也日益严重,而影响受害人获得赔偿的最为关键的因素就是归责原则。本文以归责原则为线索,打破了以往的多数论文以时间为线索、以道路交通法规的立法历程为主要参考的传统模式,围绕过错责任和无过错责任原则,分别阐述世界部分国家在交通安全事故领域对过错责任和无过错责任原则的运用和相关的学术观点,分析和探讨我国处理交通事故的相关法律法规,为我国的交通安全法规体系的进一步完善贡献微薄之力。论文从四个方面进行探讨。第一部分是绪论。首先介绍交通安全事故的定义,了解什么样的安全事故才构成交通安全事故。再通过对当前交通安全事故发生的高频率现状的分析,说明现在所存在的诸多现实问题:相当多的交通事故受害人得不到及时的救治,他们受到的物质和精神损失得不到应有的赔偿,从而认识到保护受害人利益的必要性。那么应当由谁来承担这些赔偿责任呢?归责原则至关重要,只有正确、适当的归责原则才能确保受害人的损失得到及时的赔偿,同时相关的责任主体的权益也不可肆意侵害。可见,对归责原则的研究具有深远的理论和实践意义。第二部分是过错责任原则在道路交通安全事故中的运用。过错责任原则是指以当事人过错责任大小作为确定交通事故责任大小的依据,目的在于追求责任分摊的公正。这部分首先从国外的归责原则入手。采取过错责任制的主要是英国和美国的部分州。因此,本部分将分析英国和美国部分州的归责原则及其正当性基础。之后分析国内的过错责任原则。国内的过错责任原则分为《道路交通安全法》实施之前和之后,实施之前我国实行过错责任原则,实施之后则以无过错责任为主,但机动车之间的责任分配仍采用过错责任原则。第三部分是无过错责任原则在道路交通安全事故中的运用。无过错责任原则以法律的特别规定为适用依据,只要符合法律的特别规定,交通事故一概由加害方承担责任。无过错责任不是说双方或某一方不存在过错,而是不考虑双方当事人的过错。无过错责任通常以保险制度为支撑,受害人可以先不考虑对加害人的侵权之诉,直接从保险人处取得赔偿,在得不到足额赔偿的情况下再提起侵权之诉。采取无过错责任原则的国家主要有法国、美国部分州、原苏联等国家。我国的《道路交通安全法》采用的也是无过错责任,同时以第三者强制责任保险为支撑。第四部分根据论文前面三部分的分析,为我国的法律制度的完善提出建议。分别从道路交通责任强制险、社会救助基金、责任减免和减责比例制定等方面探讨当前法律制度存在的问题和弊端。国家应当通过立法、修正等方式适当、有效地改变当前出现的混乱局面,更为有效地保护道路交通安全事故受害人的权益,同时也要使加害人和相关责任主体(如保险人)的合法权益得到保证。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since our country’s initiation of reform and opening-up program, motor vehicles bring high-speed development for Chinese economy. At the same time it makes the protection on victims of vehicle accident more and more difficult. Road traffic accident and the problems about compensations for traffic victims have become very serious in china, and the most crucial factor which influences the compensations for victims is principle of liability attribution.Most old articles take time as a clue and traffic regulation establishing course as main reference. This article take principle of liability attribution as a clue, elaborates separately how to apply these principles (principle of fault liability and no-fault liability) of liability attribution and various opinions on those in various countries. Through which, we could help resolve current disputation about principle of liability attribution, provide referenced opinions and struggle to perfect our country’s traffic regulation system.This article elaborates from the following four aspects.The first section is exordium, which introduces the definition of traffic accident and discusses what accident is a traffic accident. Through analyzing high frequency status in quo of traffic accident, many problems in reality are displayed: so many traffic victims can not get timely rescue; many of them can not get suitable compensations and victim’s benefits will not be safeguarded. Who should shoulder the compensation liability? The most important factor is principle of liability attribution. Only proper and suitable principle could ensure that victim get timely compensation for their loss and the rights and interests of correlative liability subjects can not be infracted at will. Thus, study on principle of liability attribution has profound meaning both in theory and in practice.The second section is about the application of fault liability (including presumed fault liability). Fault liability (including presumed fault liability) aims to impartiality of liability burdening and decide traffic liability according to one’s fault responsibility. This section starts with foreign principle of liability attribution. Countries which adopt fault liability are mainly Britain and some states in America. This section would analyze principle of liability attribution and the reasons in those areas. Then we should discuss fault liability in China before and after the Road Safety Code comes into effect. Our country adopt fault liability before the application of Road Safety Code and no-fault liability as a leading principle after that, but the liability distribution between motor vehicles still adopts fault liability.The third section discusses the application of no-fault liability on road traffic accident. No-fault liability works on traffic accident and inflictors shoulder the compensation responsibility once only special rules in law say that. At the same time no-fault liability not means one of or both parts do neither have faults but we don’t mind that they have faults or not. No-fault liability is generally supported by insurance system. Traffic inflictors directly gain compensations from insurance agency and pleading against their violation of tort law is not necessary. Countries and areas which mainly adopt no-fault liability are French, some states of America, former Soviet Union etc. Traffic Safety Code in our country takes no-fault liability as a leading principle supported with liability insurance.In final section, I would sum up the former three sections and provide advice for perfection of our traffic accident rule. I would discuss the problems and defects in current legal system from road traffic liability insurance, social salvation fund, reduced and immune liability etc. The government should change current troubled waters properly and effectively through lawmaking or amending, so that not only the rights and interests of traffic accident victims but also that of inflictors and relevant subjects (such as insurance agent) could be protected effectively.更多还原