Jetta did not do reasonable duty of care

DavidCadogan.ca Forums » DavidCadogan.ca

Jetta did not do reasonable duty of care

(1 post)

Started 9 years ago by sibho7fgv3

Tags:

sibho7fgv3
Member

 Chengdu Chinese Commercial News reporter Zhang Bingyao,http://www.com-corporation.co.jp/omaezaki/cgi-bin/bbs/light.cgi Car 40% responsibility ye identified Second instance court found that "Jetta round, non-motorized road not within a reasonable duty of care to do." "Forensic Sciences Although unable to confirm whether the two vehicles contact, but it was confirmed in the event of a traffic accident, Jetta cars and horse distance very close. within this short distance electric horse fell to the ground will be affected oncoming vehicle. therefore, electric horse fell to the ground and there is a causal relationship between the Jetta. " 15 million yuan compensation counted out loud noise Court confirmed that the driver of a small river horse power for the loss of more than 190,000 yuan. And because the Jetta has been off to pay high insurance protection, the Jetta driver required to compensate Lo Xiaojiang 120,450 yuan in cross-strong insurance liability limit, then, the remaining 70,000 yuan undertake further 40%. The total amount of compensation more than 150,000 yuan. November 2, 2013, Sec Jinniu Jiefang East Lane at the intersection with the probe into the road accident. When he was 18-year-old Jiang riding a horse around electrical Rose, fell on a front right side of the Jetta sedan, the accident caused a small river nine disabled. Over the past two years, this accident after the first trial, the second trial after a few days ago,doudoune moncler, the High Court has issued a formal notice of acceptance of civil cases for retrial, the case will enter the retrial process. Special is that this accident, forensic results can not be determined electric horse and Jetta have been in contact. For this play can not determine whether the contact traffic accidents, the Court of First Instance found no fault Jetta party, no bear responsibility. The court of second instance finds Jetta party should bear secondary responsibility required to compensate the small river of 15 million yuan. Event Playback Electric horse fell in front of the Jetta can not prove that the two vehicles contact At 13:50 on November 2, 2013 Xu, Mr. Luo people driving a Jetta car, driving along the Ring Road, Sec Jiefang Gate Bridge north direction from the direction to the intersection Cheng Huang East Lane, in the indicator is green when turning left front by a small lane into the bus lane. At the same time, a small river horse power driving along the Ring Road,canada goose homme, Sec Jiefang Gate Bridge north direction in the right direction bus lane road entering the intersection. Eventually, the two cars in the road with the bus case. Rowe brake brakes to stop at small electric horse in the river Jetta front right side of the fall. After the incident, a small river was quickly rushed to hospital. 143 days after treatment, medical expenses spent about 60,hogan outlet,000 yuan. Among them, Mr. Rowe pad pay medical expenses 16,900 yuan. Last April 18, was identified, a small river constitute nine disabled. Including disability compensation, etc.,woolrich outlet, the court final confirmation that this traffic accident, a small river of the loss of 19 million yuan. For that from road traffic accidents, Municipal Traffic Management Bureau issued two branch road traffic accidents proved clear, the existing evidence does not prove that the two vehicles come into contact, can not determine the party responsible. Ding Cheng Sichuan identification of forensic, said: "can not determine whether the horse Jetta and electrical contacts occurred." Why such a judgment,http://www.dukeint.co.jp,parajumpers Homme? First instance: the car does not bear responsibility Cause: Unable to prove the existence of illegal behavior left Jetta cars, horse seize the motor vehicle lanes and other irregularities exist Consultation to no avail, a small river Jinniu District Court prosecution to request compensation. Trial, Xiao Jiang said he was 20 meters away on the observed Jetta car at the intersection turn left, "not to let themselves go straight to traffic turning left when the Jetta sedan, should take full responsibility." Mr Lo said that was not his own horse power the hit, "I was driving the vehicle in the vehicle lane, intersection after the indicator shows green light, hit cornering lights turn left before the start of the vehicle into the bus lane just started,http://store.shopping.yahoo.co.jp/ebest-dvd/0000001101806.html, is still small when the rear lane when you see the electric horse coming, fast. I stopped on the brakes. Jicha was also horse power, but not in my car stopped and fell in front of the front wheels. " Ultimately, the Court of First Instance finds that, according to available evidence, the Jetta can not prove the existence of illegal behavior when left turn. On the contrary, there is horse power to seize irregularities motor vehicle lanes. "The plaintiff said that in about 20 meters away has been observed Jetta left turn, according to the normal function of the electric car is fully capable of normal speed or slow amble avoid brake to avoid an accident." The court found Jetta assumes responsibility for the accident. Second instance: the car needs bear 40% secondary responsibility Reason: Jetta did not do reasonable duty of care; very close to the two vehicles, electric vehicles approaching horse fell to the ground is bound to be affected, so the electric horse fell to the ground and there is a causal relationship Jetta Second trial Neither submit new evidence. However, judgment is required to bear 40% of the Jetta secondary liability, "Jetta when cornering, no non-road vehicles within a reasonable duty of care to do, so that the Jetta is not enough time in the process of moving on horse power with children of pre-sentence and to respond. "" Forensic Sciences Although unable to confirm whether the two vehicles in contact. but both parties described the police team investigating the accident and material point of view, it can be confirmed in the event of a traffic accident, Jetta cars and horses children very close. within this short distance electric horse fell to the ground will be affected oncoming vehicle. therefore, electric horse fell to the ground and there is a causal relationship between the Jetta. " Why pay so much? Jetta car insurance has been off, you need to pay high insurance compensation within the liability limit,http://cutyayu.sakura.ne.jp/cabbs/sunbbs.cgi?mode=form&no=106&page=/a, then the loss of the remaining 40% supported Since the time of the incident Jetta pay high insurance has been off security, based on the track cross law judicial interpretation, "not legally insured to pay compulsory insurance of motor vehicle traffic accidents caused by damage to the party requesting the insured obligation to make compensation in cross-strong insurance liability limit, the people's court should be supported . "accordingly, in addition to the need for compensation Lo Xiaojiang pay compulsory insurance within the range of 120,450 yuan, the remaining 70,000 yuan undertake further 40%. The total amount of compensation more than 150,000 yuan. Because of the second trial refused to accept Mr. Rowe for retrial. Recently, the High Court to reply, the case has officially entered the retrial procedure. Sound The case involved the responsibility of road border issues In addition to the contact can not be determined, the case is another focus for the Jetta sedan traveling,http://store.shopping.yahoo.co.jp/juraice/dx0121040.html, except to pay high insurance escape outside, and no other traffic violations. And to pay high insurance liability adjustment escape an administrative category,http://www.mirai.ne.jp/~m-yoshi/diary/apeboard_plus.cgi/, and tort liability case no causal relationship. Thus, when the court of second instance and ultimately implement attribution in living up to reasonable avoidance obligations above. Mr. Luo retrial stage agent, and Sichuan Heng Law Firm lawyers said Qiu Wenfeng, Jetta car at traffic lights turn left in the driveway, there is no fault. Jetta saw electric horse coming, take the initiative to drive their own small car parked, and no fault. "This accident, should belong to a unilateral accident, electrical accident does not belong to both horse and Jetta between." Thus, Qiu Wenfeng,http://store.shopping.yahoo.co.jp/juraice/ch106ep.html, he said that the greatest significance of the case, which involves a responsibility to identify the boundary road, where is the problem "If the responsibility for expansion without borders,http://bbs.arukikata.co.jp/bbs/tree2.php/id/91662/-/parent_contribution_id/91406, every possible traffic participants are uncomfortable, even if he has done as much as possible according to the law to drive in accordance with regulations." Accidents are not We are in contact with the premise collision An unnamed judge said that in real life is often easy to form a misunderstanding, that is the formation of traffic accidents are required to contact the collision as a precondition, "but in fact, as long as the vehicle on a road accident caused by fault or others personal injury, also constitutes a traffic accident. However, the responsibility to conclude that there must be based on whether the fault, the fault size to be determined. " 

Posted 9 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.