Legal Profession: We Should Introduce A New Judicial Interpretation Of Road Crossing Law As Soon As Possible.

The legal profession believes that 6 years ago, when the legislation was made, road traffic accidents were frequent and motor vehicles violating laws and regulations were rampant. In most cases, the non motorized vehicles were the injured party. Therefore, the objective situation of motor vehicles would suffer losses.

However, the law does not stipulate liability for non motor vehicle liability. Objectively speaking, it is tantamount to telling a non motorized vehicle driver that you are responsible for traffic accidents involving motor vehicles and vehicles.

At present, the illegal motor vehicle violation has become one of the important factors of traffic jams, so it is difficult for the law to play a role in conscientiously abide by the law of non motorized vehicles.

Experts believe that although the "road traffic law" for the loss of motor vehicle liability sharing no provisions.

However, according to the general principles applicable to the law, the provisions of the general law shall not apply to the provisions of the general law, and the liability sharing of the loss of the motor vehicle shall be determined by the provisions of the tort liability law or the general principles of the civil law.

The supreme law should be clarified through judicial interpretation.

Qiu Wei Zhang Tao

Legal links

"

(1) if a traffic accident occurs between the motor vehicles, the fault party shall bear the liability for compensation; if both parties are at fault, the liability shall be shared according to their respective fault proportions.

(two) motor vehicles and

The loss of a traffic accident is caused by a collision between a motor vehicle driver and a pedestrian, and the vehicle side shall not be liable for compensation.