The 75 -year -old man in Guangdong was hit by the road, and the traffic police determined that the court had no responsibility for the court to bear 10%responsibility

Text/Yangcheng Evening News all -media reporter Dong Liu Correspondent Chen Meiwen

The traffic rules are constrained not only driving vehicles, but also pedestrians. In daily life, pedestrians cross the road and easily cause traffic accidents. So, should pedestrians be responsible for being injured by cars and injuries by cars? The Wuhua County Court of Meizhou City reported today (September 5) that the court recently concluded a dispute over the liability for traffic accident accidents in accordance with the law, and finally ordered pedestrians to bear 10%of responsibility.

At 7:50 on October 26, 2021, Chen drove a car from the Guangdong brand from Mianyang Town to the direction of Anliu. When passing through a certain section, Liu, a 75 -year -old man who was crossing the road, had a collision. Traffic accidents of injury and damage to the Cantonese car. The traffic police brigade issued the "Road Traffic Accident" to determine that Chen was responsible for the accident. After the accident, Liu was sent to the hospital for hospitalization. Regarding the loss caused by the accident, Liu and the vehicle insurance company sued Chen and the vehicle insurance company to the court for compensation.

During the trial, the insurance company raised objections to the identification of the traffic accident responsibility. It was believed that when the accident occurred, Liu was crossing the road without walking through the crossway. The accident is equivalent.

After Liu said that after the accident occurred, neither side did not apply for a review to the traffic police department at the upper level, proving that the division of the responsibility of the two parties recognized the accident should be fully responsible for Chen.

The court trial believes that the focus of the controversy in this case lies in the confirmation of traffic accident responsibility. After the on -site investigation and investigation and evidence collection, the traffic police brigade believed that the accident was because Chen violated the provisions of Article 22 of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China, and then determined that Chen was fully responsible for the accident. However, in the litigation of civil infringement disputes, the party's responsibility cannot be determined from the cause and effect of the accident. It should be determined to determine the perception of the perpetrator's responsibility for the cause of the cause of the accident and the fault of the parties.

From the analysis of the specific situation of this case, Chen driving a motor vehicle on the road should have been driving safely and civilized driving in accordance with the operation specifications. Especially at the turning point, slow down to ensure that it is slowly passed after safety. It happened, but Chen violated the high attention obligations that a driver should have, which eventually led to the occurrence of traffic accidents in this case. It had a subjective fault on subjectiveness and should be responsible for most of them. At the time of the accident, Liu acted across the road at the turning point of the unmanned horizontal label line, and there was a cross trail mark line from the accident not far from the accident. According to Article 62 of the Law, Liu's behavior is also one of the causes of the traffic accident in this case.

Source | Yangcheng Evening News · Yangcheng School

Editor -in -law | Chen Qian

School pair | Zhou Yong

- END -