Actual collision is not a necessary element; causation determines the establishment of infringement.

Compiled from: Jufa, Juxian County People's Court, People's 法院 报
 
Case review
Around 17:06 on May 11, 2019, A was driving a Xiang-brand heavy-duty dump truck. While passing a section of road, when overtaking B's Xinlei-brand two-wheeled electric vehicle traveling in the same direction ahead, the two-wheeled electric vehicle fell over (the two vehicles did not make contact), resulting in B being injured and the two-wheeled electric vehicle damaged in a road traffic accident.

 
 

After the first and second instance trials, both parties were dissatisfied and applied for retrial. The retrial court held that the focus of the dispute in this case was whether the injury caused by Party B not coming into contact with Party A constituted a traffic accident, and whether Party A should bear liability for Party B's losses. According to Article 119 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, "contact" is not a prerequisite for constituting a traffic accident or assuming liability; as long as there is a causal relationship between the party's conduct and the harmful result, and the party is at fault, they should bear corresponding liability. Therefore, the defendant's argument that there was no contact or collision between the original plaintiff and their vehicle, and thus no basic fact of a traffic accident, was not valid.
 
 
 
In this case, Party A's overtaking maneuver with a truck posed significant danger to the surrounding environment, and the truck's hazardous nature and ability to avoid danger were greater than those of an electric bicycle, imposing a higher duty of care for traffic safety. When overtaking, Party A should have paid attention to the traffic conditions in adjacent lanes, reserving sufficient safe time and space for others to ensure safe driving. However, Party A failed to provide evidence of having fulfilled this duty of care, and it could be determined that there was a causal relationship between the overtaking act and the harmful result in this case. Therefore, Party A constituted a tort. However, Party B also had violations of traffic regulations, such as driving without a license and not wearing a helmet, and was at fault for the occurrence of the accident, thus should bear some responsibility.
 
Relevant Laws
Article 119 of the Road Traffic Safety Law
The following terms in this Law mean:
(5) "Traffic accident" refers to an incident involving personal injury or death or property loss caused by fault or accident on the road by a vehicle.

 

 
[1] The author's perspective
From the above legal provision, it can be seen that whether a collision occurs is not a necessary condition for constituting a traffic accident; as long as a vehicle causes an incident of "personal injury or death or property loss due to fault or accident" on the road, it qualifies as a traffic accident.
 
[1] A non-contact accident generally refers to a situation where, at the time of the incident, the vehicles or a vehicle and a pedestrian do not actually collide physically, but one party causes certain damage to the other due to illegal honking, evasive actions, braking, parking, or changing lights.
 
[2] Generally, the following four points are used to determine liability in non-contact traffic accidents:
 
[3] (1) Whether a danger was created to the surrounding environment. This is assessed based on factors such as the time, location, vehicle speed, weather conditions, and vehicle condition at the time of the accident, primarily considering the visibility of vehicles or pedestrians, the specific speed based on circumstances, and whether the vehicle has illegal over-height or over-width conditions.
 
[4] (2) Whether the victim had fault or special circumstances. Considering the parties' situations, if the victim had fault or a special physical condition, the other party's liability is correspondingly reduced. For example, if the victim has severe heart disease and a vehicle's loud horn startles them, triggering a heart attack, the motor vehicle party's liability would be reduced. Additionally, if the victim violated traffic rules first, the other party's liability would also be reduced.
 
[5] (3) Whether there is a causal relationship. Whether there is a causal link between the legal consequence of the victim's injury and the driver's behavior is one of the essential elements for determining a traffic accident. The establishment of tort liability must be premised on a causal relationship between the actor's conduct and the damage.
 
[6] (4) Whether there is a situation of necessity. If the danger is caused by natural factors, the person acting under necessity may not bear liability or may provide appropriate compensation. If the measures taken under necessity are improper or exceed the necessary limits, causing undue damage, the person acting under necessity shall bear appropriate liability.
 
In summary, for non-contact traffic accidents, even if the two parties have no direct contact, if the vehicle is at fault and causes personal injury or property damage to the other party, the vehicle owner shall bear corresponding liability.