Court Awards CNY 130,203 in Traffic Accident Case
In a recent decision, a court in Eastern China City ordered an insurance company and two defendants to pay a total of CNY 130,203.66 in damages to a worker injured in a road accident. The case involved a collision between a truck and a loading worker, with the driver found fully at fault. The judgment addressed issues of liability, insurance coverage, and the calculation of damages for medical expenses, lost income, and disability.
The dispute arose from an accident on March 16, 2010, in Eastern China City. The defendant, Mr. Dai, was driving a medium-sized dump truck after unloading at a construction site. While reversing, he struck Mr. Wang, a loading worker who was changing clothes behind the vehicle. Mr. Wang sustained serious injuries, including a comminuted fracture of the right distal femur and a dislocation of the right shoulder. The traffic police determined that Mr. Dai bore full responsibility for the accident. Mr. Wang sued Mr. Dai, the truck’s registered owner Ruixin Transport Company, and the insurer PICC Shucheng Branch, seeking compensation for medical costs, lost wages, and other losses.
During the court hearing, Mr. Wang presented evidence including medical records, wage slips, and a disability assessment. He claimed he had been employed as a loader since 2009, earning a monthly salary of CNY 3,000 and living in company-provided housing in Eastern China City. Mr. Dai acknowledged the accident but argued that the insurer should pay first. PICC Shucheng Branch disputed the authenticity of Mr. Wang’s wage records, requesting a handwriting analysis on the payroll documents. However, the insurer later failed to pay the required fee for the forensic examination, and the court treated the request as withdrawn. Medical bills showed total treatment costs of CNY 26,965.56, of which Mr. Dai had already paid CNY 21,320.
The court found that Mr. Dai’s negligent driving caused Mr. Wang’s injuries. It noted that the truck was insured under a compulsory traffic liability policy and a commercial third‑party liability policy with a limit of CNY 300,000, but without a “no‑deductible” clause. The court held that the insurer must pay compensation directly to the injured party. Regarding damages, the court accepted Mr. Wang’s claim that he had resided and worked in an urban area for a sustained period, thus applying the urban standard for disability compensation. A forensic assessment rated his injury as a level‑nine disability. The court also accepted the medical expert’s opinion and the recommended recovery periods from the hospital discharge notes.
The court’s legal analysis centered on the application of tort law and insurance contract principles. It held that Mr. Dai and Ruixin Transport Company were jointly and severally liable for damages. Since Mr. Dai held full responsibility, the compulsory insurance covered the first CNY 10,000 of medical expenses and up to CNY 110,000 for disability and other losses under the death/disability category. For the remaining medical costs, the commercial policy applied, but because the policy lacked a “no‑deductible” endorsement, the insurer was required to pay only 80% of the excess, while Mr. Dai and the transport company bore the remaining 20%. The court also awarded CNY 700 for the forensic assessment fee, to be paid directly by the defendants.
The court ultimately ordered PICC Shucheng Branch to pay CNY 111,298.10 under the compulsory policy (including amounts already advanced by Mr. Dai) and CNY 14,564.45 under the commercial policy. Mr. Dai and Ruixin Transport Company were directed to jointly pay the remaining CNY 3,641.11 in medical costs plus the CNY 700 assessment fee. All amounts were to be settled within ten days of the judgment. This case illustrates how courts apply insurance clauses and urban residence criteria in road accident claims, and highlights the importance of maintaining clear employment and residency records when seeking compensation.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.