Child Pedestrian Awarded Over 40,000 Yuan After Being Struck by Truck on Roadside

A truck driver in Sichuan Province has been held fully liable for an accident in which his vehicle struck a child walking along the roadside. The child suffered a complex elbow fracture, nerve damage, and other injuries that resulted in a tenth-level disability rating.

The accident occurred on December 30, 2010, at around 3:40 PM on a national highway in Luzhou city. The truck driver lost control of his vehicle and struck the child who was walking along the side of the road. Traffic police investigated and determined that the driver bore full responsibility for the accident. The child had no responsibility.

The child was taken to a local hospital where he was hospitalized for 32 days. His injuries included a complex fracture and dislocation of the right elbow joint, damage to three nerves in the right arm, a hematoma on the right forehead, and multiple soft tissue contusions and abrasions across his body. The truck driver paid for all medical expenses during this initial hospitalization.

The child required a second surgery in July 2011 and was hospitalized for an additional 6 days. The family paid 4,206.61 yuan for this second hospitalization and related examinations. After the second surgery, the child underwent a disability assessment at a judicial appraisal institute, which determined he had suffered a tenth-level disability. The assessment cost 700 yuan.

The child’s family filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for disability compensation, assessment fees, emotional distress damages, nursing care, hospital meal allowances, transportation costs, follow-up medical expenses, and nutritional supplements. Their total claim was 42,328.61 yuan.

An important issue in the case was whether the disability compensation should be calculated using urban or rural standards. The child’s family lived in a rural area, but evidence showed that the father had been doing business in the urban district since October 2009, and the family including the child had been living with him in the urban area. The child attended kindergarten in the city. Based on this evidence, the court determined that the disability compensation should be calculated using urban standards, which are higher than rural standards.

The court calculated the child’s losses as follows. Disability compensation of 30,922 yuan based on the urban annual per capita disposable income of 15,461 yuan multiplied by 20 years and the tenth-level disability rate of 10 percent. Assessment fee of 700 yuan as evidenced by the receipt. Emotional distress compensation of 2,000 yuan. Nursing fee of 2,280 yuan for 38 days at 60 yuan per day. Hospital meal allowance of 380 yuan for 38 days at 10 yuan per day. Transportation fee of 300 yuan. Medical expenses of 4,206.61 yuan. The total came to 40,788.61 yuan.

The court rejected the claim for nutritional supplements because there was no medical advice recommending enhanced nutrition. The transportation claim was reduced from 500 yuan to 300 yuan based on the court’s assessment of reasonable expenses.

The truck was registered with a transportation company under a vehicle affiliation arrangement, which is a common practice in China where individual truck owners register their vehicles with transportation companies for operational purposes. The truck had both mandatory traffic accident liability insurance and commercial third-party liability insurance with coverage up to 500,000 yuan.

Since the driver bore full responsibility and the total compensation was within the insurance coverage limits, the court ordered the insurance company to pay the full 40,788.61 yuan. The transportation company was held jointly liable as the affiliated entity.

This case illustrates how courts handle disability compensation for children who move from rural to urban areas with their families. When a family has genuinely relocated to an urban area for work or business and the child lives and attends school there, courts will apply the higher urban compensation standards even if the household registration remains rural.

Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is based on publicly available court records and is intended for educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult qualified legal professionals for advice specific to their circumstances.