Ignoring details leads to big mistakes, multiple causes lead to one result to determine responsibility.

[2] Compiled from: Zibo High-tech Zone Court, Shandong High Court
 
Case review
One night in 2022, taxi driver Zhao was transporting passenger Qian when the two argued over the taxi fare. After both exited the vehicle and engaged in a physical altercation, Qian collapsed in the main traffic lane, and Zhao immediately drove away. Ten minutes later, Sun drove through that section of road and collided with Qian, who was lying in the middle of the road, causing Qian’s death. After the accident, Sun drove away from the scene. Upon inspection by the traffic police department, liability for this accident could not be determined. According to an appraisal institution, Qian’s blood alcohol content was 337.65mg/100ml, indicating a state of intoxication. After the criminal matters involving Zhao and Sun were handled in separate proceedings, Qian’s family member Li filed a lawsuit with the court against Zhao, Sun, and the insurance companies underwriting the vehicles driven by Zhao and Sun, demanding that all parties jointly compensate for various losses totaling more than 1.28 million yuan.

 

The People's Court of Zibo High-tech Zone, after trial, held that the tortious acts successively committed by Zhao and Sun respectively caused the serious consequence of Qian's death. Among these, Sun drove a vehicle that ran over Qian, which was the direct cause of Qian's death. The traffic police department's accident determination report also recorded that Sun drove a motor vehicle at excessive speed, failed to observe sufficiently, and did not drive safely in accordance with operating norms. Therefore, Sun should bear 70% of the compensation liability in this case. Zhao, as a taxi driver, violently beat Qian due to a fare dispute, causing Qian to lie in the traffic lane. He should have clearly known that placing Qian on a road with heavy traffic created a high risk of being struck by other vehicles, ultimately leading to the serious harmful consequence of Qian being run over and killed by a vehicle coming from behind, and should bear 20% of the compensation liability. Qian, as an adult, allowed himself to remain in a state of intoxication, argued with Zhao due to a driving dispute, opened the door and got out of the vehicle despite the danger, and lay down in the traffic lane of a major urban road at night, violating traffic safety regulations and also being at fault, and should bear 10% of the liability himself. Zhao's faulty act itself was not a motor vehicle traffic accident, and the insurance company should not bear compensation liability within the scope of insurance liability.
 
Ultimately, the court, in accordance with Article 1208 and Article 1173 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China and Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, ruled that the insurance company underwriting the vehicle driven by Sun shall compensate Li for various losses in the amount of over RMB 900,000 within the scope of insurance coverage, and Zhao shall compensate Li for various losses in the amount of over RMB 200,000.
 
 
 
Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
[6] Article 1208
If a motor vehicle causes damage in a traffic accident, liability for compensation shall be borne in accordance with the road traffic safety law and the relevant provisions of this Law.
 
Article 1173
If the injured party is also at fault for the occurrence or escalation of the same damage, the liability of the tortfeasor may be reduced.
 
The [1] The People's Republic of China Road Traffic Safety Law
Article 76
If a motor vehicle causes personal injury or property damage in a traffic accident, the insurance company shall compensate within the liability limit of the compulsory motor vehicle third-party liability insurance; for any shortfall, liability for compensation shall be borne in accordance with the following provisions:
[1] In traffic accidents between motor vehicles, the party at fault shall bear liability for compensation; if both parties are at fault, liability shall be shared according to the proportion of their respective faults.
[2] (2) In traffic accidents between a motor vehicle and a non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian, if the non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian is not at fault, the motor vehicle party shall bear liability for compensation; if there is evidence that the non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian is at fault, the motor vehicle party's liability shall be appropriately reduced based on the degree of fault; if the motor vehicle party is not at fault, it shall bear no more than ten percent of the compensation liability.
 
 
[1] The author's perspective
[3] This case is a typical example of multiple causes leading to one result, meaning that multiple acts directly or indirectly cause the same harmful outcome, and these acts are often continuous. In such circumstances, determining the actor's liability requires examining the degree of fault in their conduct and the strength of the causal relationship between the conduct and the harmful result.
 
[4] In this case, Qian was already in a state of intoxication. Zhao, as the taxi driver carrying Qian, abandoned him in a dangerous place like the road despite knowing Qian was intoxicated. Even if there was a fare dispute between Qian and Zhao, it cannot justify disregarding another's personal safety, so Zhao bearing partial liability is both lawful and reasonable. Finally, Sun not only drove over the speed limit but also fled after running over Qian, and the act of running over was the primary cause of Qian's death, so Sun bears primary liability. Additionally, both Zhao and Sun must face not only civil compensation but also criminal proceedings, demonstrating how important it is to obey traffic rules and not act impulsively, as neglecting these small details can easily lead to major mistakes.