The traffic accident cannot be clarified, and the responsibility for the traffic accident cannot be

In the case that the liability for traffic accidents between motor vehicles cannot be determined, the specific contents of the handling measures are as follows:

In this case, if the party at fault bears the liability for compensation according to Article 76 of the Traffic Safety Law, that is, the compensation ratio is divided according to the principle of fault liability, then there will be no proportion to follow. But in fact, if one party has evidence in court to prove that the other party is at fault, or if the other party's fault responsibility is in fact greater than its own, then it is also likely to obtain the judge's recognition that its fault is smaller, so as to obtain a judgment more favorable to itself. Otherwise, if liability cannot be determined, the court is likely to allow all parties to share the proportion of compensation for the accident in accordance with the principle of fairness under civil law.

Circumstances in which the liability for accidents between motor vehicles, non-motor vehicles, and pedestrians cannot be determined. For traffic accidents between motor vehicles and non-motorized and pedestrians, the principle of presumption of fault liability shall be applied to the motor vehicle party. If the motor vehicle party cannot prove that the non-motor vehicle party is at fault, then the motor vehicle party will bear full responsibility; If there is evidence that the non-motorized party is at fault, then the liability of the motorized party can be reduced.

In the case of non-intentional action by the motor vehicle, the motor vehicle party shall not be liable. Since the responsibility for the accident cannot be determined, in this case, it can be presumed that the motor vehicle party bears full responsibility for the accident.

Circumstances in which the liability for an accident between a non-motorized vehicle and a non-motorized vehicle cannot be determined. In the case of traffic accidents between non-motor vehicles, the relevant provisions of the Traffic Safety Law and the General Principles of the Civil Law are also applicable, and in the case that the liability cannot be determined, it can be distributed among the parties in accordance with the principle of fairness.

The traffic accident certificate plays an important role in accident compensation as evidence. Therefore, if a party wants to reduce its own liability for the accident or compensation, it must obtain a certificate of accident liability that is more favorable to it or can provide more evidence of the other party's greater fault when it is not possible to determine the liability of each law.

Shenzhen Traffic Death Compensation.

If the traffic accident cannot be clarified, the traffic police will issue a "Road Traffic Accident Certificate", and the court will determine the civil liability of both parties in the traffic accident based on the evidence provided by the parties and the facts determined by the review.

In recent years, in many traffic accident cases, due to unclear facts or other reasons, the responsibility for the accident cannot be determined, and it is difficult for the public security traffic police department to determine the responsibility of both parties.

According to Article 50 of the Provisions on Procedures for Handling Road Traffic Accidents, if the cause of a road traffic accident cannot be ascertained, the traffic management department of the public security organ shall issue a road traffic accident certificate, stating the time and place of the road traffic accident, the circumstances of the parties and the facts obtained from the investigation, and serve them on the parties respectively.

In judicial practice, under normal circumstances, if the responsibility for a traffic accident cannot be determined, either party needs to collect relevant evidence to prove that the other party is at fault, and after the lawsuit, the judge will make a judgment based on the comprehensive circumstances such as the statement of facts and the evidence provided by both parties, which is the embodiment of the judge's discretion. In this case, the lawsuit can only be brought to the court, and the court will decide whether the parties are at fault and the allocation of responsibilities according to the actual situation.

If both parties are at fault, the responsibility shall be shared according to the fault principle; If there is no fault, then in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code on the principle of fairness, both parties shall bear the responsibility of fairness. Since all motor vehicles are insured with compulsory traffic insurance, if the amount of loss is small and the amount of compensation is within the scope of insurance claims, the victim can be compensated by the insurance company as long as he proves that the other party is at fault, and it is not necessary to prove the extent of the tortfeasor's liability.

The principle of "the superior burden of danger" can be applied, and factors such as the magnitude of the risk of vehicle collision and the degree of risk avoidance ability can be comprehensively analyzed, and the party with greater danger in terms of speed, hardness and weight may be ruled to bear the main civil liability for compensation.

The so-called principle of the superior burden of danger refers to the distribution of the damage consequences of the traffic accident according to the degree of danger of the motor vehicle and the superiority of the ability to avoid danger in the liability for road traffic accidents, given that the perpetrator and the victim are equally negligent, taking into account the severity of the duty of care of both parties to road traffic regulations.

The principle of the superior hazard burden does not have this concept in China's current laws and administrative regulations, but the requirements of the superior hazard burden principle have been reflected in many laws and regulations. The Civil Code stipulates that a person who engages in high-altitude, high-pressure, flammable, explosive, highly toxic, radioactive, high-speed transportation and other operations that are highly dangerous to the surrounding environment and causes damage to others shall bear civil liability; If it can be proved that the damage was intentionally caused by the victim, no civil liability is incurred.

From the perspective of the original legislative intent, whether it is a high-speed means of transportation should be measured by whether it is a high danger to the surrounding environment, and as a modern means of transportation, due to its own mass, volume and power, even if it is driven at a slower speed, it will have an impact on the surroundings, which has been proven in people's daily life experience and many cases. Therefore, the understanding of high-speed transport vehicles should be to emphasize the tool itself rather than focusing on whether it is high-speed, and the provisions on no-fault liability should still be considered, so that in accordance with Article 74, Paragraph 2 of the Opinions on Several Issues of the Civil Procedure Law, the reversal of the burden of proof shall apply, and the party with greater risk shall bear the legal risk of failure to provide evidence.

If there is no problem with the traffic accident at the time of the inspection and there are sequelae after the accident, it is indeed proved to be related to the accident and can be sued for resolution. If the victim suffers personal injury, the compensation obligor shall compensate for the various filial piety expenses incurred due to medical treatment and the loss of income due to lost work, including medical expenses, lost work expenses, nursing expenses, transportation expenses, accommodation expenses, hospital meal subsidies, and necessary nutrition expenses. Shut up teasing.