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
[3] One night in 2022, taxi driver Zhao was transporting passenger Qian when they argued over the fare. After both got out and fought, Qian lay down on the main roadway, and Zhao drove away. Ten minutes later, Sun drove through the area and collided with Qian, who was lying in the middle of the road, causing Qian’s death. Sun then left the scene. The traffic police determined that the accident liability could not be assigned. Forensic testing showed Qian’s blood alcohol level was 337.65 mg/100ml, indicating intoxication. After Zhao and Sun were separately prosecuted for criminal offenses, Qian’s family member Li sued Zhao, Sun, and their vehicle insurers, demanding over 1.28 million yuan in damages.

 

[4] The Zibo High-tech Zone People’s Court found that Zhao and Sun’s successive tortious acts caused Qian’s death. Sun’s running over Qian was the direct cause, and the traffic accident report noted Sun was speeding, failed to observe adequately, and did not drive safely per regulations, so Sun bore 70% liability. Zhao, as a taxi driver, violently assaulted Qian over a fare dispute, leaving him lying on the roadway, aware of the high risk of being hit by other vehicles, leading to Qian’s death, and bore 20% liability. Qian, as an adult, voluntarily became intoxicated, argued with Zhao, recklessly exited the vehicle, and lay on a main road at night, violating traffic laws, and bore 10% liability. Zhao’s misconduct was not a motor vehicle accident, so his insurer was not liable.
 
[5] The court, under Article 1208 and Article 1173 of the Civil Code and Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, ordered Sun’s insurer to pay Li over 900,000 yuan in damages and Zhao to pay over 200,000 yuan.
 
 
 
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.
 
《 [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.