The insured vehicle "the personnel on the car" can be transformed into a motor vehicle

The compulsory third party liability insurance in the "third"

     A, case introduction

   Zhang take Lee driving the car in the winding road, after a jog in the road, the vehicle accident occurs, Zhang opened the door and jumped out of the car, in order to hedge, but the car has lost balance, tumbling to the direction of Zhang, Zhang had run over. After the accident, Zhang relatives asked the accident vehicle insurance the insurance company in the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance within the limits of Zhang suffered personal injury damages compensation, but the insurance company to Zhang for "the personnel on the car" for exclusions, a relative to the court, require the insurance company to assume insurance liability according to law.

   Two, the court case

   Court of the first instance that, any person not permanently in the car, the insurance contract in "third" and "the personnel on the car" is a specific spatial conditions of identity, which is not fixed, variable can be as conditions varied identity. In this case, Zhang is "the personnel on the car" before the accident, but at the time of the accident the hedging has jumped out, jumped out of the car and behavior is not caused by the direct death, but in the insurance outside the vehicle, the changes in identity, is the accident vehicle ran over, should be regarded as a "third party" the insurance company should bear, to Zhang relatives insurance payment obligations in accordance with the provisions of the insurance contract. The verdict is delivered, the insurance company refuses to obey, appeal.

The second instance court think, Zhang jumped out of the car, the insured vehicle in accident, Zhang is still "the personnel on the car", cannot become the third insured vehicle outside of the "". Zhang's death loss is not applicable to motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance limit the scope of compensation claim object. The court of second instance verdict, dismissed Zhang relatives request the insurance company claims litigation request.

   Three, the main views and reasons

   Formed two views on the case.

   The first view, Zhang in the vehicle before the accident occurred while riding the vehicle, is "the personnel on the car", but it jumped out of the car while the vehicle is in danger, and is traveling in the insured vehicle formed "relationship relative to the third", "with the insurance Ordinance and the" Road Traffic Safety Law "in the" third "case, should think that it is the insured vehicle outside personnel, by insurance companies in motor vehicle compulsory third party liability insurance limits the scope of compensation. The reasons are: (1) the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance in the "third" is a relative concept, not the concept of the absolute. Motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance is the insurance company to the insured motor vehicle road traffic accidents caused by the vehicle, be casualties, property loss insurance victims except the people, be compulsory liability insurance compensation within the limit of liability. According to the provisions of the motor vehicle third party liability insurance clause, "third" refers to the addition of the insured, the insurer and the insured is outside, victims of insurance vehicle insurance vehicle accidents suffered casualties or property losses. Motor vehicle is one kind of transportation tool, anyone would not permanently in a motor vehicle, "the third person" and "car people" are temporary identity under certain time-space conditions, two can change due to the specific conditions of time and space and transformation. If the victim in the accident occurred before the insurance vehicle "the personnel on the car," accidents have exposure to the insured vehicle, do not belong to the insurance vehicle "the personnel on the car". Therefore, judging by insurance accident happens to the vehicle traffic accident victims belong to "third" or the "staff car", should be the victim in the traffic accident happened at this particular time is in the vehicle above as the basis, in the car is "the personnel on the car, the car is" as the "third". (2) in the case of fact, Zhang was the accident vehicles belonging to the victims killed, insurance vehicle insurance vehicle accidents suffered personal injury or loss of property. Although Zhang in the traffic accident occurred before the insurance vehicle "the personnel on the car", but this fact does not affect its in the traffic accidents in the "third" identity. The traffic accident, Zhang is not on the insured vehicle, but outside the vehicle, if Zhang is the insurance vehicle "the personnel on the car" in the traffic accidents occur, it is not possible to be crushed. Therefore, the insurance company that Zhang does not belong to the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance compensation within the grounds of appeal can not be established claim object. (3) the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance to ensure that "third" is injured by accident can receive compensation from insurance, to avoid the owner of the vehicle and driver no compensation ability and can not obtain relief occurs. Further, the risk of strong social function, in order to reduce and resolve social contradictions, to achieve social fairness and justice. The traffic accident injury cases, especially the heavy, serious injury cases, should focus on the protection of victims, fully safeguard the legitimate interests of victims in the premise of not violating the laws and regulations. From this perspective, it should be identified in the case of Zhang "third party", as the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance limit the scope of compensation claim object.

   To sum up, analyze the regression of motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance "third" concept, combined with the facts of this case, starting from the protection of the interests of the victim's point of view, should be the victim Zhang as the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance limit the scope of compensation claims object.

   The main reason for the second opinion is: (1) from the explanation theory standpoint, the car personnel explained in the memory range third people in disorder. The first "motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance regulations" provisions of article twenty-first, the insured motor vehicle traffic caused by the vehicle, to be the victim casualties, property loss insurance people outside, by insurance companies in accordance with the law in the motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance liability limits the scope of compensation. From the literal interpretation, the vehicle shall include motor vehicle drivers and passengers. The driver is excluded from the scope of third people, the main reason is that the driver was driving behavior I resulting in damage, in accordance with the principle of tort law, they cannot be their own rights and assume responsibility for infringement of paternity. Therefore, also cannot become the compulsory liability insurance third. Secondly, about passengers, the legislation of our country is be excluded from the scope of the third party, the main reason is: first, the system of the compulsory liability insurance the possibility to set up to level and claim in general, premium insured the factors such as the balance between. Therefore, we need to consider the scope of compensation, including the right to claim for compensation in the main scope and limitation of compensation. The law clearly defined circumstances, should think, lawmakers are reasonable considering the above factors, to make such provisions. In other words, the whole range of third people involved in the system of compulsory insurance, need to take into consideration various factors. If improper to expand the scope of the third person, may cause the whole system finally overwhelmed, but is not conducive to the majority of the compensation of the victims. Therefore, it can be said, in the law case, the scope of the third person problem is beyond the scope of judicial judgment. Specifically, the scope should not be extended to explain the third. Because, limit of liability of motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance is certain, if the special form of the car personnel also included in the "third" of the compensation, the compensation amount will correspondingly reduce the car directly against the "third party", against the third party liability insurance for the purpose of establishment. Second, apart from the compulsory insurance of motor vehicles, passengers still exist in other ways, for example, staff car insurance, the contract of carriage contract responsibility, more importantly, in the two car collision case, motor vehicle the car researchers are received the other vehicle compulsory liability insurance, therefore, should see, the car motor vehicle compulsory liability insurance protection is not the only solution to passengers.

To sum up, from the theory of interpretation standpoint, motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance has a certain social welfare purposes, it is the protection of certain interest groups, legislators have made clear the limit, therefore, as a judge, should recognize, expand the scope of the interest groups will likely affect the motor vehicle third party the system of compulsory liability insurance and play its function, therefore, should be careful to treat.

   (2) from the uniform application of law and fact finding can consider operation, the first opinion also has many problems, such as, "what is the specific time" the traffic accident? This moment is the last moment motor vehicle damage, or that the process from the danger of traffic accidents occur to the last substantial damage occurred? Passengers because of the accident itself is not only a physical concept and the concept of space, it is a concept, the first view is a legal concept of "purification" as a concept of space, not fully realized between various interests under the current laws of balance, is difficult. To sum up, the establishment of the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance purposes, not to deal with "third" extended interpretation, in this case the victim Zhang can not be used as the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance limit the scope of compensation claim object.

   A court in four, the Supreme People's court public opinion

   When the insured vehicle traffic accidents, such as the vehicle out of the insured vehicle, can not be regarded as the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance "the third person", it should not be used as motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance limit the scope of compensation claim object.