Traffic Accident Victim Awarded 1,600 RMB in Food and Nursing Expenses in Multi-Vehicle Collision Case

Traffic Accident Victim Awarded 1,600 RMB in Food and Nursing Expenses in Multi-Vehicle Collision Case

CASE OVERVIEW

A civil court in Central China has ruled on a personal injury claim arising from a two-vehicle collision that injured nine passengers. The court ordered the insurance company of the at-fault driver to pay 1,120 RMB and the secondary driver to pay 480 RMB to the plaintiff, Mr. Wu, for hospital food and nursing expenses. The judgment clarifies the allocation of liability between multiple insurers and drivers in a multi-victim accident.

CASE BACKGROUND AND FACTS

On February 19, 2010, at approximately 14:45, a collision occurred on National Highway G205. Defendant Mr. Xu was driving a small passenger vehicle from Heyuan towards Huizhou. At the same location, Defendant Mr. Xie was driving another small passenger vehicle. The two vehicles collided, causing injuries to Mr. Xie and eight passengers in Mr. Xie’s vehicle, including the plaintiff, Mr. Wu.

The traffic police department investigated the accident and issued a determination. They found that Defendant Mr. Xu bore primary responsibility for the collision, while Defendant Mr. Xie bore secondary responsibility. The passengers were found to bear no responsibility for the accident.

Mr. Wu sustained injuries and was hospitalized for 16 days, from February 19, 2010, to March 7, 2010. Defendant Mr. Xu paid all of Mr. Wu’s medical expenses. However, the parties could not reach a settlement on other losses, leading Mr. Wu to file a lawsuit on September 28, 2010.

COURT PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE

Mr. Wu sought compensation totaling 1,600 RMB, calculated as 800 RMB for hospital food allowance (50 RMB per day for 16 days) and 800 RMB for nursing care (50 RMB per day for 16 days). He requested that Defendant Mr. Xu pay 1,120 RMB, Defendant Mr. Xie pay 480 RMB, and that the insurance companies be held liable within their policy limits.

The court examined the insurance policies in place. Defendant Mr. Xu had purchased compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and a third-party liability insurance policy with a limit of 1,000,000 RMB from China Life Property and Casualty Insurance Company Shenzhen Branch. Defendant Mr. Xie had purchased compulsory insurance from China United Property Insurance Company for his vehicle.

During proceedings, Defendant Mr. Xu did not dispute the facts of the accident but argued that his insurer should cover his share of liability. China Life Insurance argued that its liability was limited to 70 percent of the loss, capped at 10,000 RMB in total for all eight victims under the compulsory insurance medical expense limit. Defendant Mr. Xie denied responsibility, claiming he had not violated traffic rules. China United Insurance argued that Mr. Wu was a passenger in the insured vehicle, not a third party, and therefore not covered under the compulsory policy.

COURT FINDINGS AND JUDGMENT

The court accepted the traffic police department’s accident determination as factual and legally sound. It found Defendant Mr. Xu primarily responsible and Defendant Mr. Xie secondarily responsible.

The court calculated Mr. Wu’s total losses at 1,600 RMB. Applying the relevant legal standards, the court held that China Life Insurance must pay 1,120 RMB to Mr. Wu. This amount represented Mr. Wu’s share of the 10,000 RMB compulsory insurance medical expense limit, divided equally among the eight victims. The remaining 480 RMB was to be paid by Defendant Mr. Xie.

The court rejected Mr. Xie’s defense that he bore no responsibility, noting the traffic police determination was binding. The court also dismissed the claim against China United Insurance, as its policy covered third-party liability, not injuries to passengers in the insured vehicle.

The court ordered China Life Insurance to pay 1,120 RMB and Defendant Mr. Xie to pay 480 RMB within 10 days of the judgment taking effect. The court also ordered the defendants to bear the 50 RMB court filing fee. All other claims were dismissed.

KEY LEGAL PRINCIPLES

This case applies several fundamental principles of Chinese tort and insurance law. The General Principles of Civil Law Article 119 establishes the right to compensation for personal injury. The Supreme Peoples Court Interpretation on Personal Injury Compensation Article 17 provides the framework for calculating damages, including hospital food allowances and nursing fees.

The Traffic Safety Law Article 76 governs liability allocation in motor vehicle accidents, requiring insurers to pay within compulsory policy limits before apportioning remaining liability between at-fault parties. The Civil Procedure Law Article 64 requires parties to prove their claims, while Article 130 allows default judgment when a defendant fails to appear.

The judgment also illustrates the principle that compulsory insurance covers third-party victims, not passengers in the insured vehicle. This distinction is critical in multi-vehicle accidents involving multiple insurance policies.

PRACTICAL INSIGHTS

This case offers several practical lessons for accident victims and legal practitioners. Victims should promptly document all losses, including hospital stays and care needs, as these are recoverable under Chinese law. When multiple victims are involved in a single accident, the compulsory insurance limit is shared equally among them, which may result in partial recovery.

Drivers should ensure they carry adequate insurance coverage. While compulsory insurance provides a base level of protection, third-party liability policies can cover excess damages. The case also highlights that passengers in a vehicle cannot claim against that vehicle’s compulsory insurance, only against the at-fault vehicle’s policy.

Defendants should carefully review traffic police determinations, as courts generally accept these as conclusive evidence of fault. Challenging such determinations requires strong counter-evidence.

LEGAL REFERENCES

General Principles of Civil Law of the Peoples Republic of China, Article 119.
Civil Procedure Law of the Peoples Republic of China (2007 Revision), Articles 64 and 130.
Supreme Peoples Court Interpretation on Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Personal Injury Compensation Cases, Article 17.
Traffic Safety Law of the Peoples Republic of China, Article 76.
Guangdong Province 2010 Standards for Calculating Personal Injury Compensation.

DISCLAIMER

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and court interpretations may vary by jurisdiction and change over time. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional for advice regarding their specific circumstances.