道路交通事故责任认定研究

余凌云

道路交通事故责任认定研究

Determination of Liabilities for Road Traffic Accident


    期刊名称:《法学研究》
    期刊年份:
    作者:余凌云
    单位:清华大学法学院
    中文关键词:交通事故;责任认定;专家证言;行政诉讼
    英文关键词:traffic accident;determination of responsibility;expert witness;administrative litigation
    中文摘要:
    针对道路交通事故责任认定是否可诉这一问题,法院和公安机关进行了长期的角力。这一问题的实质在于,应由谁承担涉及专业判断的过错认定职责,而产生这一问题的深层次原因却在于,道路交通安全法确立的完全开放的专家证言模式无法一蹴而就,法官不愿意采纳专家证言并承受审判风险,因此会尽量依赖警察的责任认定。未来,应当改革道路交通事故责任认定制度,采取可控的开放模式,这样既对现有机制震动不大,又能有序推进制度的改革。
    英文摘要:
    Whether police decisions on comparative negligence percentages can be sued or not is in fact a question about who should take the responsibility of making such decisions:the judge or the police? The practice after the adoption of Road Safety Law in 2003 has highlighted the bankruptcy of the legal provision that police decision in this regard is just an evidence and it is for the judge to decide whether it is valid and acceptable or not. Judges are not willing to take the risk of making a judgment on technical issues which they are not familiar with. In the meantime, except for the police report, judges will not trust and rely on the statement provided by experts outside the court and police bureau, since some experts may be captured by the parties and provide false evidence or untrue statement. Unfortunately, lacking of technical knowledge, judges have no ability to find out the truth. Many civil and administrative cases have revealed that judges always prefer to support or withdraw the police decision, rather than to alter it. That means judges rely heavily on police to find out the fact. Therefore, this author suggests that, a controllable open model should be adopted in the future reform of this system. Under this model, a panel consisting of police and relevant experts should be set up, and the majority members of the panel should be experts. They should work together and make the relevant decisions. In this way, they could achieve comparative independence, and their decisions will be acceptable by both the judge and parties. This model can ensure the smooth and successful implementation of the reform.
    全文阅读:  点击下载

相关文章!
  • 中国数据跨境调取路径探析——以

    特定情况下的数据跨境调取需要在传统的司法互助协定方式基础上补充其他路径。中国在坚持以双边司法互助协定和互惠原则为主要方式的基

  • 折中主义与理想主义之辩——评西

    美国西蒙尼德斯教授在新著的《全球冲突法立法:国际比较研究》一书中,提出晚近国际私法背离了萨维尼理论所追求的理想主义,呈现折中主义

  • 离岸信托避税规制的域外经验及

    作为信托的类型之一,离岸信托是指根据外国法律设立的信托。在信托本身固有的灵活机制之上,离岸信托充分利用了离岸管辖区的税收优势,成