Adjudication Rules on the Determination of Third Parties in Traffic Accidents (II)

Adjudication Rules on the Determination of Third Parties in Traffic Accidents (II)

18. Legal answering network: When the owner stands next to the self-owned vehicle that has not been started, and is knocked down by the displacement of the vehicle caused by other vehicles hitting the self-owned vehicle, whether the owner belongs to the third party for the self-owned vehicle

【Consultation content】:

According to the definition of a third party in motor vehicle third-party liability insurance, a third party refers to a person who suffers personal injury or property damage due to an accident involving the insured motor vehicle, but does not include the policyholder, the insured and the persons on board the insured motor vehicle. If the policyholder is struck by his vehicle outside of his vehicle, is the policyholder a third party as defined in the insurance contract?

【Q&A】:

shall belong to a third party. Since the design of the third-party liability insurance system in mainland China is based on motor vehicles rather than people (drivers), in the design of the third-party liability insurance system in mainland China, the policyholder is only a party to the insurance contract established with the insurer, and it is more of an obligation than a right in the insurance legal relationship, that is, the obligation to pay insurance premiums and perform the obligation to inform truthfully, while the insurance legal relationship, especially the property insurance legal relationship, not only includes the two parties to the establishment of the insurance contract, but also the more important subject of rights is the insured. In addition to the policyholder, the scope of the insured also includes the legal driver allowed by it, which leads to the separation of the policyholder and the actual driver of the car. Therefore, although the motor vehicle insurance contract stipulates that the insured includes the insured and the legal driver allowed by it, this is a general provision on the scope of the insured, and the "third party" and "insured" involved in the motor vehicle insurance contract are temporary identities under specific spatio-temporal conditions, that is, neither the "third party" nor the "insured" are permanent and fixed identities, and they can be transformed due to changes in specific spatio-temporal conditions. In practice, the insured and the legal driver allowed by the insured cannot appear as the insured at the same time, and can only choose one or the other, that is, in the specific case of a specific traffic accident, the insured is either the insured himself or the legal driver allowed by him. In other words, the so-called "insured" in motor vehicle insurance is a concept that needs to be specified and can only be determined when a traffic accident occurs. Therefore, when the policyholder is not in the car, the policyholder, like other ordinary third parties, loses control over the danger of the motor vehicle, and of course can also become a victim of third-party liability insurance compensation. At the same time, Article 14 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases of Compensation for Damages in Road Traffic Accidents stipulates that when the insured suffers damage caused by the driver of a motor vehicle permitted by the policyholder, the policyholder may also request compensation from the insurance company that underwrites the compulsory traffic insurance, unless the policyholder is a person in the vehicle. Although this article is a provision for compensation for compulsory traffic insurance, it clarifies that the insured can become a "third party" when he is outside the car, so as to claim compensation liability from the insurance company.

19. Jiangxi High People's Court Trial and Supervision Division: Adjudication Rules on the Identification of Persons and Third Parties in the Vehicle

【Viewpoint Analysis】:

We believe that a combination of subjective and objective criteria can be adopted to accurately determine the identity of the occupants and third parties. For a person who is in the position of a motor vehicle carrying a person for the purpose of riding, when he or she is injured in a traffic accident caused by a motor vehicle, he or she shall be deemed to be a person on the vehicle, and the liability insurance of the person on the vehicle may be claimed. The reasons are: first, the on-board personnel liability insurance, also known as the on-board personnel seat insurance, can be subdivided into driver's seat insurance and passenger seat insurance, and the original intention of the establishment of this type of insurance is to take the seat space as a reference. Therefore, under normal circumstances, to judge whether it is a person in the vehicle, objectively speaking, whether it is in the position of the motor vehicle should be used as the criterion. Second, in practice, the liability insurance for on-board personnel generally clearly regards the personal injury or death of illegal or illegal passengers as an exemption circumstance, that is, the legal ride is a condition for the compensation of the on-board personnel liability insurance. Therefore, in general, the criterion for judging whether it is a person on the bus is subjectively the purpose of boarding or not should be used as the criterion. In the case that both subjectively and objectively conform to the characteristics of the personnel on the vehicle, the identity of the relevant personnel shall be determined to be the personnel on the vehicle, and for the injuries suffered due to road traffic accidents, the liability insurance of the personnel on the vehicle can be claimed.

For a person who is in a non-passenger position of the motor vehicle and does not use it for the purpose of riding, when his or her personal injury is caused by a traffic accident involving a motor vehicle, he or she shall not be recognized as a person on the vehicle, but shall be recognized as a third party, and the third-party insurance compensation may be claimed. There are four main reasons for this:

First, it is not in line with the public's perception to identify a person who is in a non-passenger position of a motor vehicle as a person on the vehicle. Article 4 of the Model Clauses for Commercial Insurance of Motor Vehicles (2014 Edition) stipulates that "the persons on board the vehicle in this insurance contract refer to the persons in or on the body of the insured motor vehicle at the moment of the accident, including the persons who are getting on and off the vehicle". In this regard, there is a view that the person in the car is a concept corresponding to the person under the car, and in the event of a traffic accident, as long as the person is not under the car, but is located in the car body or any part of the car body, it should be recognized as the person on the car. This view that people who are not "under the vehicle" are "people on the vehicle", and that the person who is in the non-passenger position of the motor vehicle is also identified as the person on the vehicle is not in line with the public's perception. From the general people's language habits, if a person stands on the roof of the car or stands on the hood of the car, it is generally not simple to use the term "on the car", but will be more specific, the word "car" has its specific meaning in the hearts of the public, and its reference is basically equivalent to "in the car", such as in the cab, in a closed or semi-enclosed compartment (except for motorcycles and other motor vehicles without a compartment).

Second, identifying a person who is in a non-passenger position of a motor vehicle as a person on board is not in line with the original intention of the establishment of liability insurance for persons on board. As a profit-making commercial organization, an insurance company establishes any commercial insurance for profit-making reasons. When the on-board occupancy liability insurance was first established, it only provided insurance coverage for personal injury or death caused by a traffic accident for the driver and occupant in the approved seat. If the spatial scope of the insured personnel of this type of insurance is expanded to non-safe parts such as the roof, the possibility of traffic accidents and the probability and degree of casualties during the driving of the vehicle will be greatly increased, and the total compensation cost of the insurance is very likely to exceed the total premium collected, and the profitability of the insurance company cannot be discussed.

Third, persons who are not for the purpose of boarding shall not be recognized as persons on the bus. As a means of transportation, the daily important role of motor vehicles is to play their transportation functions. People who are in a motor vehicle are often also for the purpose of riding, using its transportation function to achieve the purpose of helping themselves travel. The purpose of the establishment of the on-board personnel liability insurance should be to ensure the transportation safety of the driver and passengers. Therefore, the personnel on the vehicle should be closely related to the operation of the vehicle and can achieve the purpose of transportation through the operation of the vehicle. Persons who do not have the purpose of boarding and lack connection with the transportation function of the vehicle are difficult to identify as persons on the vehicle.

Fourth, persons who are in a non-passenger position of a motor vehicle and do not use it for the purpose of boarding generally meet the constitutive requirements of a third party. In practice, the exclusion method is adopted for compulsory traffic insurance, and the victim other than the person on the vehicle and the insured is identified as a third party, in which the insured includes the policyholder and its permitted driver. After Article 17 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases of Compensation for Damages in Road Traffic Accidents includes non-driving policyholders in the scope of third parties, persons who are in the non-passenger position of the motor vehicle and do not use it for the purpose of riding can basically be identified as a third party as long as they are not drivers. At the same time, during the trial of the case, it should be noted that the "Motor Vehicle Third Party Liability Insurance Clauses" formulated by various insurance companies contain relevant clauses that exclude the policyholder, insurer, the insured and the persons on board, as well as the family members of the insured, the driver of the insured vehicle and its family members from the scope of the third party of the commercial third-party insurance. Therefore, in the commercial third-party insurance, the above-mentioned persons may not be recognized as the occupants of the vehicle or the third party in the commercial third-party insurance.

[Source of opinion]: Jiangxi Provincial High People's Court Trial Supervision Division Research Group, "Investigation of Difficult Legal Issues and Adjudication Rules in Cases of Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability Disputes Involving Three Insurances"

20. Analysis of the Judgment Criteria for the Conversion of Persons on the Vehicles into Third Parties in Motor Vehicle Traffic Accidents -- Wang Mouliang et al. v. A Mechanical and Electrical Equipment Company and an Insurance Company in a Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability Dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

In single-vehicle traffic accidents, it is common for the occupants of the vehicle to suffer injuries outside the vehicle, and the identification of the victim is related to whether the victim can be protected by third-party liability insurance, and this issue is controversial in both theory and practice. Starting from factors such as the purpose of the establishment of liability insurance, the constitutive elements of tort liability, and the principle of proximate cause of insurance, the problem of third-party transformation can be dealt with by distinguishing different subjects and different situations. Whether a passenger can be converted into a third party should be judged on whether the injury suffered by the passenger is due to a danger inside or outside the vehicle.

[Case Analysis]:

(1) Analysis of whether the driver can be converted into a typical situation of a third party

First, the driver was injured or injured due to the car after getting off the car normally. If the driver gets out of the car temporarily to inspect the vehicle, troubleshoot, etc., his obligations and risks are not changed due to the temporary parking of the vehicle, and he subjectively has no intention of ending the driving process, he is still performing the driver's duties, and it should be determined that it is a reasonable extension of the driving behavior, and it cannot be mechanically considered that he is no longer the person of the vehicle because he is temporarily separated from the motor vehicle in space.

Second, the driver is injured or injured after leaving the vehicle under normal circumstances and no other third-party factors have been involved. The more common situation is that the driver is thrown out of the car due to collision or being run over by the car resulting in casualties, from the occurrence of danger to the occurrence of damage consequences is a continuous process, because there is no intervention of other factors, the driver's casualties can be regarded as an extension of the initial danger, and according to the principle of proximate cause, the driver's injury or death can be attributed to the initial danger, at this time the driver has not lost control of the vehicle and the control of the danger, can not become his own tortfeasor.

Third, after the driver gets out of the car normally, the third-party vehicle hits the car and then collides and runs over the driver, resulting in casualties. The third type of situation is a very special type, and there are similar cases in judicial practice. In this case, the joint effect of the third-party vehicle and the vehicle is the cause of the driver's death or injury, and the danger of the accident is beyond the driver's control due to the involvement of other vehicles, so the author prefers that the driver can be converted into a third party of the vehicle in this case.

(2) Analysis of whether the passenger can be converted into a third party

First, casualties in the process of getting on and off the bus. Getting on and off the bus is a continuous process, and passengers have experienced the transformation of space inside and outside the car, which should be marked by whether the final goal of the passenger is achieved, and if the purpose has not been achieved, it should be judged to be in the state before the transformation. In the process of getting on the bus, most of the passenger's body is outside the car, and the vehicle has not yet formed a close attachment relationship, and lacks the protection of the vehicle, should be recognized as a person outside the car; In the process of getting off the bus, most of the passenger's body is in the car, the dependency relationship with the motor vehicle is not completely contacted, and he still enjoys the protection function of the motor vehicle, and has a stronger ability to resist risks, and should be recognized as a person in the car. In short, passengers who have not completed the purpose of boarding the bus will still be treated as people outside the bus, and passengers who have not completed the purpose of getting off the bus will still be treated as people inside the bus.

Second, being thrown out of the car under abnormal circumstances and not being injured in contact with the car. The casualty of the passenger being thrown out of the car is a continuous process, at the initial time of the accident, that is, when the passenger is still in the car space, the injury has already begun to occur, and there is no risk This antecedent will not cause the passenger to leave the vehicle, and the subsequent casualty of being thrown out of the car is the extended result of the injury in the car, and there is no other factor involved, that is, the final result is caused by the risk in the car, and the passenger cannot be converted into a third party in the car.

Third, under abnormal circumstances, being thrown out of the car and being injured in contact with the car. It is common to be injured or injured after the passenger is thrown out of the car and suffers from the collision and crushing of the car, in this case, the risk in the car is only an inducement, and the passenger is not the inevitable result of being thrown out of the car, it is precisely because of the intervention of other factors that the causal relationship between the risk in the car and the damage consequence is severed, and the risk outside the car is the decisive cause of the occurrence of the damage consequence, and the passenger can be converted into the third party of the car at this time.

[Case source]: Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court "Zhizheng Research" official account

21. The driver was hit by his own vehicle and died due to the rollover, and the third-party liability insurance compensation could not be applied -- Tang Mouxiang et al. v. People's Property Insurance Suijiang County Branch Insurance Company Insurance Contract Dispute Case

[Summary of the trial]:

The third party in the compulsory insurance contract for motor vehicle traffic accident liability does not include the persons on the insured motor vehicle and the insured. Therefore, in the process of repairing a vehicle on the road, when the driver dies due to the rollover of the vehicle, the driver, as the insured, does not fall into the category of "third party", so he cannot be compensated by the third party liability insurance.

Case No.: :(2012) Yun Gao Min Zai Zhong Zi No. 56

22. The case of a motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute between Han Moujun and the Qitai County Branch of Life Property Insurance and Shihezi Branch of People's Property and Casualty Insurance - if the driver is injured outside the car, is it transformed into the "third party" of the compulsory traffic insurance and commercial insurance of the car?

[Summary of the trial]:

Although the driver's injury is caused by the car outside the vehicle, he is the driver of the insured motor vehicle, and he has actual control over the insured motor vehicle, and the driver, as the insured, cannot be converted into a third party.

According to Article 3 of the "People's Property Insurance Motor Vehicle Comprehensive Commercial Insurance Clause", "the third party in this insurance contract refers to the person who suffers personal injury or death or property damage due to an accident of the insured motor vehicle, but does not include the persons on board the insured motor vehicle and the insured". In this case, Han Moujun, as the driver, was inspecting the rear tail light of the trailer, and the brake failure caused Han Moujun's left leg to be fractured. The original trial court found that Han Moujun, as the driver of the vehicle, was the direct cause of the damage consequence, and although Han Moujun's injury was caused by the car outside the vehicle, he was the driver of the insured motor vehicle, and he had actual control over the insured motor vehicle, and the driver, as the insured, could not be converted into a third party. According to the relevant contents of the compulsory insurance clause of motor vehicle traffic accident liability and the clause of motor vehicle commercial insurance, it is not subject to the compulsory traffic insurance and third-party commercial liability insurance, and the relevant losses should not be compensated by the compulsory traffic insurance and third-party commercial liability insurance. Han Moujun, as the owner and actual operator of the vehicle, should maintain and overhaul the vehicle in a timely manner, so that the vehicle it operates meets the operating conditions, and because he failed to fulfill his due responsibilities, the accident caused his own damage, and he is all at fault, and he should bear the economic losses claimed. Han Moujun's argument that his losses should be compensated by the insurance company within the limits of compulsory traffic insurance and third-party commercial liability insurance cannot be sustained.

Case number: (2021) Xin 23 Min Zhong No. 2446 (2022) Xin Min Shen No. 788

23. If the driver is killed by the vehicle he is driving when he leaves the vehicle for inspection after the vehicle breaks down, can it be converted into the "third party" of the vehicle's compulsory traffic insurance and commercial insurance?

[Summary of the trial]:

Although the driver was killed by the vehicle in this accident, the accident was caused by his own fault, and because he could not become the infringer and responsibility bearer of his own rights and interests, he could not be transformed into a third party in the compulsory traffic insurance and commercial insurance of the vehicle he was driving.

Case Number: :(2020) Lu 15 Min Zhong No. 80 (2021) Lu Min Shen No. 4252

24. A third party who can be converted into a trailer under special circumstances - Li Qijia et al. v. Bohai Property Insurance Lu'an Company et al., a motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

When the traffic accident occurred, the cab of the main car was hit and fell off by the trailer, resulting in the death of the driver of the main car. At this time, the driver of the main vehicle is converted into a third party relative to the trailer, and the insurance company of the trailer shall bear the liability for the compensation of the commercial third-party insurance. The driver of the main car is still a person in the car relative to the main car, and the insurance company of the main car shall be liable for the driver's seat insurance.

25. When the driver of the vehicle got off the car to check the road conditions due to the snowy downhill section, the car rolled over him, and his identity has been transformed from the driver to a "third party" - the case of the insurance contract dispute between the applicant and the respondent Ningxia and Dingbian Company

[Summary of the trial]:

The High People's Court of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region found that when Cai, the driver of the vehicle involved in the case, got out of the car to check the road conditions due to snow, the vehicle rolled and ran over him. At the time of the traffic accident, Cai was outside the vehicle and did not actually control the vehicle, and it was not improper for the original judgment to find that Cai's identity had been transformed from a driver to a "third party", which fell within the scope of insurance liability involved in the case. Ningxia XX Company purchased the "Compulsory Traffic Accident Liability Insurance" and third-party liability insurance from XX Insurance Yinchuan Branch Company for the vehicles involved in the case, and after the accident occurred, Ningxia XX Company, as the counterparty to the insurance contract, had the right to claim insurance compensation liability from XX Insurance Yinchuan Branch. Although Dingbian XX Company was not the insured of the insurance contract involved in the case, it actually paid all the compensation payments to Cai's family, and both Ningxia XX Company and Cai's family agreed to claim rights from the insurer, and Ningxia XX Company and Dingbian XX Company had no objection to each other's identity as plaintiffs, so it was not improper for the original trial court to rule that XX Insurance Yinchuan Branch Company should pay compensation to Ningxia XX Company and Dingbian XX Company. The application for retrial of the Yinchuan branch of XX Insurance Company cannot be established after verification, and this court will not support it.

Case Number: :(2023) Ning Min Shen No. 2032

26. If the person in the vehicle is already outside the vehicle at the time of the traffic accident, it will be transformed into a third party, and the rules of compulsory traffic insurance compensation shall apply——Liu Zhiwei v. PICC Property Insurance Luoyang Branch Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability Dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

If the person in the car is thrown out of the car and injured in a traffic accident, and since the accident is already outside the car and the protection of the car is lost, it shall be deemed that the injured person has been converted from the person in the car to a third party, and the insurance company shall compensate within the limit of the compulsory traffic insurance.

Case No.: :(2013) Luo Min Zhong Zi No. 828

27. Can the insured be compensated by the third party liability insurance as a third party in a traffic accident?

[Summary of the trial]:

According to the provisions of the Insurance Law, liability insurance is an insurance that takes the liability of the insured to a third party in accordance with the law as the subject of insurance. It can be seen that the premise and basis for the insurer to bear the liability in liability insurance is that the insured should be liable for compensation to others as the element, and there is no liability and no insurance. In this case, Yang, as the insured, caused his own injuries by others, and as a victim, he was not the subject of liability and was not legally liable for compensation to others. The damage of the insured, Yang Mougang, was not covered by the third-party liability insurance, so Yang Mougang's claim that Yongan Insurance Company should bear the liability for compensation had no legal basis, and his request was not supported by this court.

Case Number: :(2019) Lu 0211 Min Chu No. 12021 (2020) Lu 02 Min Zhong No. 9485

28. Tian Mouchun, Guan Mouliang, Guan Mouwen, Songyuan City Bus Company, and Pacific Property Insurance Songyuan Central Branch Company, a motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

Article 3 of the Regulations on Compulsory Insurance of Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability stipulates that: "The compulsory insurance of motor vehicle traffic accident liability referred to in these Regulations refers to the compulsory liability insurance in which the insurance company compensates within the liability limit for the personal injury or death or property loss of the insured person or the victim other than the insured caused by a road traffic accident of the insured motor vehicle." Article 5 of the Compulsory Insurance Clause for Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability stipulates that "the victim in the compulsory traffic insurance contract refers to the person who suffers personal injury or death or property damage due to the traffic accident of the insured motor vehicle, but does not include the persons on board the insured motor vehicle and the insured." Article 3 of the Model Clauses of Comprehensive Commercial Insurance for Motor Vehicles of the Insurance Association of China stipulates that: "The third party in this insurance contract refers to the person who suffers personal injury or death or property damage due to an accident of the insured motor vehicle, but does not include the persons on board the insured motor vehicle and the insured." Article 4 stipulates: "The persons on the vehicle in this insurance contract refer to the persons in or on the body of the insured motor vehicle at the moment of the accident, including the persons who are getting on and off the vehicle." ”

This court held that the determination of whether Tian Mouchun was a person in the car or a third party should be judged on the basis of Tian Yuchun's identity at the time of the infringement. In this case, the road traffic accident identification of the Accident Handling Brigade of the Traffic Police Detachment of the Songyuan City Public Security Bureau determined that "Tian Mouchun was injured because the car door was not closed and Tian Mouchun was thrown out of the car." "The surveillance video of the bus involved in the case shows that the bus door was not closed at the time of the incident, and Tian Mouchun got off the bus and fell down during the operation of the vehicle, causing injuries. Based on the above evidence, it can be determined that Tian Mouchun was getting out of the car at the time of the infringement, and he belonged to the people who were getting on and off the bus, that is, the people in the car, and did not belong to the third party in the compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and commercial insurance. The second-instance judgment held that Songwon Pacific Insurance Company did not bear insurance liability within the scope of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and commercial third-party insurance, and the facts were clear and the law was correctly applied.

Case No.: :(2018) Ji Min Zai No. 271

29. The "third party" in a traffic accident is the victim other than the person in the car and the insured (the insured and the legal driver allowed by him) - Li v. Insurance Liability Dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

If a driver causes a traffic accident due to his own improper operation, causing his own damage, he cannot become the tortfeasor of his own interests, so the driver cannot be identified as a "third party", and the damage caused to him cannot be compensated by compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party insurance.

[Case source]: People's Court Daily, August 30, 2018, page 7

30. The relatives of the insured motor vehicle driver belong to the "third party" determined by the compulsory traffic insurance and the commercial three-party insurance - a motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute between Zhang and an insurance company

[Summary of the trial]:

If the relatives of the driver of the insured motor vehicle are hit by the insured motor vehicle after getting out of the car, it also falls within the scope of "third party" determined by the compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third party insurance, and the insurance company shall compensate for it. If the insurance company cannot prove that it has fulfilled its obligation to remind and explain to the policyholder the content of the clause exempting the insurer from liability in the insurance contract, the exemption clause shall not have legal effect. In the standard contract provided by the insurance company, if there is a standard clause that exempts the insurer's liability, increases the liability of the other party, and excludes the beneficiary's rights in accordance with the law, the standard clause shall be invalid.

[Case source]: XPCC Court Network Release time: June 8, 2015

31. Yuan v. Property Insurance Company A and Property Insurance Company B for Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability - A passenger who was injured by hanging down because his clothes were caught in the door after getting off the car belonged to a "third party" in the insurance contract

[Summary of the trial]:

The People's Court of Shangjie District, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province held that both compulsory traffic insurance and commercial insurance belong to the scope of third-party liability insurance, and that the judgment of whether the victim suffered by an accidental traffic accident involving the insured vehicle is a "third party" or a "person on the vehicle" should be based on whether the victim was on the insured vehicle at this specific time at the time of the traffic accident. In this case, after Yuan got out of the car and closed the door, only his clothes were clamped to the door, and he had separated from the vehicle at the time of the traffic accident, so he was a "third party" in the accident and belonged to the compensation object of compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party insurance. Yuan's property insurance company A and property insurance company B should be liable for compensation within the limit of compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party insurance respectively, and because Yuan did not sue the actual infringer, the part of the insurance compensation is insufficient by himself. Property Insurance Company A appealed against the first-instance judgment. The Intermediate People's Court of Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, ruled to reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

[Judge's Afterword]:

The "third party" and the "person on the vehicle" involved in the insurance contract are temporary identities under specific time and space conditions, and non-permanent and fixed identities, both of which can be transformed due to changes in specific time conditions. To determine whether a person injured in a traffic accident involving an insured vehicle is a "third party" or a "person on board", the basis shall be whether or not he was on top of the insured vehicle under the specific time and space conditions at the time of the accident. When there is a dispute over the definition of "occupant of the vehicle" and "third party", a determination should be made in accordance with the law based on the nature of compulsory traffic insurance and the concept of fairness that is conducive to the victim obtaining adequate compensation. Therefore, it can be judged from two aspects of time and space: one is to take the moment of traffic accident as the time node, rather than the result of the accident as the time node. The second is to consider the vehicle in space, that is, the personnel of the vehicle in the compulsory traffic insurance, generally refer to the personnel located in the safety parts such as the cab or compartment of the motor vehicle at the moment of the insured accident, excluding the personnel who were originally in the car but located under the car at the moment of the insured accident. In this case, at the time of the accident, Yuan had completed the action of getting out of the car and closing the door in the spatial position, and was already outside the car body, and was no longer a whole with the vehicle; In terms of safety, it is at a disadvantage compared with the people on the car in the full sense, that is, it is no longer a participant in the traffic of the car, and it has been in the same position as outsiders in traffic safety. Therefore, Yuan belongs to the "third party" within the scope of insurance compensation.

[Case source]: "2023 Cases of Chinese Courts" (Road Traffic Accident Fascicle)

32. Xu Mourong et al. v. Tan Moumin, Zhou Moujun, and People's Property Insurance Ji'an Branch Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability Dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

The car personnel, drivers, and third parties are all concepts that need to be specificized, and they are all temporary identities under specific time and space conditions, not permanent and fixed identities, and the identity of the victim when the insured vehicle is involved in a traffic accident must be based on the condition of the person at this specific time at the time of the traffic accident. In this case, the deceased Shan Mouping was already under a heavy-duty semi-trailer tractor at the time of the traffic accident involved in the case, and actually lost control of the vehicle. And according to the traffic accident liability determination, the vehicle driven by the deceased Shan Mouping bears secondary responsibility for the accident. According to this, Shan Mouping's identity has been transformed from a driver to a third party. At the same time, from the perspective of protecting the interests of the victims, the first-instance judgment found that it was more appropriate for Ji'an Insurance Company to compensate for part of the losses.

Case Number: :(2019) Xiangmin Zai No. 205

33. A case of motor vehicle traffic accident liability disputes between You Mouling et al. and Jiang Moujun, Jiyang Hengtong Logistics, Zheshang Property Insurance Jinan Jiyang Branch, Juye Xinnuo Transportation Co., Ltd., Qu Mouwei, Qingdao Evorui Logistics, Chang'an Liability Insurance Shiyan Central Branch, and Taiping Property Insurance Heze Central Branch

[Summary of the trial]:

The issue of how to define the identity of a third party in compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party insurance, and whether the person in the vehicle and the person on the vehicle can be converted into a third party due to traffic accidents caused by the accident under the insurance law, is a relatively controversial issue in judicial practice. After searching for similar cases, the adjudication opinions of the four levels of courts across the country are very inconsistent. As far as this case is concerned, according to the facts ascertained in the original trial, when the traffic accident occurred, the motor vehicle driven by Oil Mouxuan had been stopped, and at this time, You Hongxuan was not on the motor vehicle he was driving, but completely separated from the motor vehicle he was driving, but when he was under the car, the vehicle driven by Jiang Shijun collided with the motor vehicle that had been stopped, causing injuries and death to Oil Mouxuan. In the absence of specific provisions in the law, the court of first instance determined that You Mouxuan had the status of a third party and fell within the scope of the compensation of the third party, based on its own understanding and cognition of the current law, and made a judgment within the scope of a reasonable judgment based on its own understanding and cognition of the current law, and was not improper.

Case No.: :(2021) Lu Min Shen No. 3579

34. Li Mouhui, Tian Mouqun, Liu Moutian and Feng Mouchun, Gong Mouhui, Bengbu Haina Beichuan Transportation Co., Ltd., and Dubang Property Insurance Anhui Branch, a motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

The "third party" and the "occupant of the vehicle" in the insurance contract are temporary identities under specific spatio-temporal conditions, and they can be transformed due to changes in specific spatio-temporal conditions. The second-instance judgment found that Liu Jinming was transformed from a "person on the vehicle" into a third party who suffered personal injury outside the vehicle due to the vehicle rolling over and was subject to compensation under the compulsory traffic insurance and motor vehicle third-party liability insurance insured by the vehicle, and the law was correctly applied.

Case Number: :(2020) Wan Min Shen No. 3741

35. Case of motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute between Liu Moubo and Harbin Central Branch of Pacific Property and Casualty Insurance

[Summary of the trial]:

The first paragraph of Article 21 of the Regulations on Compulsory Insurance of Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability stipulates that: "If a road traffic accident occurs in an insured motor vehicle and causes personal injury or death or property loss to the victim other than the vehicle personnel and the insured, the insurance company shall compensate within the limit of the compulsory insurance liability for motor vehicle traffic accident liability in accordance with the law." To determine whether a person injured by an accident involving an insured vehicle is a "third party" or a "person in the vehicle", it must be based on whether the person was present in the insured vehicle at a specific time at the time of the accident, and the person in the vehicle is the "person in the vehicle". A person who is injured in an accident involving an insured vehicle is a "third party" if he or she was a person in the insured vehicle before the accident, as long as he or she was under the insured vehicle at the time of the accident. In this case, Xiao Mouwei drove the vehicle that caused the accident and collided with the rear of the vehicle driven by Li Moulong. At the moment of the collision, Liu Moubo was thrown out of the car due to the collision, and was on top of the vehicle driven by Li Moulong, and did not come into contact with the vehicle driven by Xiao Mouwei after the collision, that is, Liu Moubo was still on the vehicle at the moment of the accident. Therefore, on the basis of comprehensively considering the facts of the case that have been ascertained, it is not improper for the court of first instance to find that Liu Moubo cannot be converted into a third party by the occupants of the vehicle driven by Xiao Mouwei.

Case No.: :(2021) Ji Min Shen No. 1010

36. Wang Mouyuan v. Gao Mouwei, Lingbi Ruihua Logistics and Transportation Co., Ltd., and Tianan Property Insurance Lingbi Branch Company applied for retrial of the motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

Although there are controversies in judicial practice, according to the Supreme People's Court's Guiding Cases and the opinions of relevant judicial interpretations, the difference between the persons on the vehicle and the persons outside the vehicle is relatively fixed, and there is no question of "transformation" into a third party if the person on the vehicle is separated from the vehicle due to the impact of the traffic accident or other reasons. That is, it cannot be regarded as a "third party" in the compulsory third-party liability insurance of motor vehicles, and it should not be regarded as the object of compensation within the scope of the compulsory insurance of motor third-party liability.

Case Number: :(2019) Zhe Min Zai No. 483

37. The cause of death caused by the driver's vehicle being knocked over by his own vehicle while repairing the vehicle does not belong to a traffic accident and is not subject to third-party liability insurance compensation -- Tang Mouxiang et al. v. People's Property Insurance Suijiang County Branch Insurance Insurance Contract Dispute Case

[Summary of the trial]:

The driver was killed by his own vehicle rolling over during maintenance, which is not a road traffic accident, and the insurance company does not need to be liable for compensation to the family of the deceased in accordance with the third-party liability insurance.

Case No.: :(2012) Yun Gao Min Zai Zhong Zi No. 56

38. Liu Mouyan v. Lu'an Wan Transportation Service Co., Ltd. and Bohai Property Insurance Lu'an Central Branch Company Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability Dispute

[Summary of the trial]:

The victim Zhang Mouwu was crushed and died during the rolling process of the accident vehicle, and the time node of the accident was that the accident vehicle lost control and rolled over after rushing out of the effective road surface, causing the victim Zhang Mouwu to be partially separated from the body of the car and being collided and crushed by the car, compared with the heavy-duty semi-trailer tractor, the victim Zhang Mouwu was the "third party" of the car. The original trial court found that the victim Zhang Mouwu was not a person on board the vehicle at the time of his death, but should be a "third party" of the accident vehicle, and that it was not improper for Bohai Financial Insurance Lu'an Company to bear the liability for compensation within the limit of the motor vehicle insurance liability it underwrote.

Case Number: :(2020) Wan Min Shen No. 2628

39. The insured who commits the tortious act is not a third party of the infringed vehicle owned by him

[Summary of the trial]:

According to the basic principles of tort law, the perpetrator of any tort cannot be the victim of such a tort case, and when the tortfeasor suffers damage as a result, he should claim compensation on other grounds (such as occupational safety) or resolve it through personal accident insurance or other non-liability insurance. In other words, in a general tort, the tortfeasor cannot claim that he is liable for his own damages. In other words, according to the definition of liability insurance in the Insurance Law and the agreement on insurance liability in the insurance contract, the plaintiff who commits a general tort cannot become a third party infringed by the tort. In this case, Chen and Su were both employees of the plaintiff who were performing work tasks, and personnel performing work tasks of legal persons or unincorporated organizations carried out civil juristic acts in the name of legal persons or unincorporated organizations on matters within the scope of their authority, which became effective against legal persons or unincorporated organizations. If the staff of the employer causes damage to others due to the performance of their work tasks, the employer shall bear the tort liability. The direct infringer of the traffic accident in this case is the plaintiff, and the right holder of the vehicle maintenance costs, rescue expenses, crane fees and other property losses caused by the traffic accident in this case is the plaintiff. To sum up, the plaintiff cannot claim to be liable for this part of the loss, so this part of the loss does not belong to the insurance liability of the compulsory traffic insurance and the commercial third party insurance, and the plaintiff's claim lacks factual and legal basis, and this court does not support it.

Case Number: :(2021) Yue 0607 Min Chu No. 536

Transferred from the same judgment rule for similar cases