CNY 14,300 Vehicle Damage Claim in Traffic Accident
A lighting company in Eastern China City brought a lawsuit against a motorcyclist and his insurer after a traffic accident caused damage to the company vehicle. The court held that the insurance company must pay its compulsory liability limit, and the motorcyclist must cover a portion of the remaining losses based on his degree of fault.
On 5 May 2011, an employee of the plaintiff company, Mr. Yu, was driving the company’s car southward on a road in Eastern China City. As he turned left at an intersection, his vehicle collided with a motorcycle ridden by Mr. Yang, which was travelling straight from the opposite direction. Both vehicles were damaged, and Mr. Yang sustained injuries. The traffic police determined that Mr. Yu bore primary responsibility for the accident and Mr. Yang bore secondary responsibility. The plaintiff company incurred vehicle repair costs of CNY 13,900 and a salvage fee of CNY 400, totalling CNY 14,300. The motorcycle was insured under a compulsory traffic insurance policy issued by Pacific Insurance Eastern China City Branch. The company sued, seeking CNY 2,000 from the insurer under the compulsory limit and CNY 4,920 from Mr. Yang, representing 40 percent of the remaining CNY 12,300. The insurer admitted liability for the CNY 2,000 limit. Mr. Yang did not respond to the lawsuit or appear in court.
During the hearing, the plaintiff submitted several items of evidence, including the official accident report, invoices for repairs and salvage, a vehicle damage assessment report, the compulsory insurance policy for the motorcycle, and the registration certificates for both vehicles. The court examined these documents in open court and found them to be admissible and credible. The insurer’s representative attended the hearing and did not contest the facts or evidence. Mr. Yang, despite being properly served with notice, failed to appear without justification. The court therefore proceeded with the trial based on the evidence presented.
The court found that the traffic police’s fault determination was reliable and adopted it: the company’s employee was 70 percent at fault, and Mr. Yang was 30 percent at fault. Because the motorcycle was covered by compulsory insurance, the insurer was required under law to compensate the plaintiff’s property losses up to the policy limit of CNY 2,000. For the remaining CNY 12,300, Mr. Yang was liable only for 30 percent, not the 40 percent claimed. The court accordingly ordered the insurer to pay CNY 2,000 within ten days of the judgment, and Mr. Yang to pay CNY 3,690. The court rejected the plaintiff’s claim for a higher proportion from Mr. Yang.
The legal basis for the decision was Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, which provides that in accidents between motor vehicles, the compulsory insurer pays first up to its limit, and any excess is allocated according to the parties’ respective fault. The court also applied Article 130 of the Civil Procedure Law, allowing a default judgment against a defendant who fails to appear. The judgment reflects the standard approach in Chinese traffic accident litigation: insurers bear fixed compulsory amounts, while the remaining loss is apportioned in line with the negligence percentages assigned by the traffic police.
This case illustrates how courts allocate property damage liability in a two-vehicle collision where both drivers share fault. The plaintiff company was able to recover a portion of its repair costs directly from the insurer, but had to pursue the individual defendant for the balance. The default judgment against Mr. Yang shows that a defendant who does not participate in the proceedings still faces enforceable obligations. For businesses, this case highlights the importance of ensuring that company vehicles are properly insured, and that employees understand the consequences of negligent driving.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.