Court Awards CNY 14,433 in Car Accident Injury Case
A court in Central China City has ordered an insurance company to pay damages of CNY 14,433 to a woman injured in a road accident, resolving a dispute over post-discharge medical expenses and permanent disability. The plaintiff, Ms. Wang, had previously received compensation for her initial hospital treatment, but later sought additional sums for a ten-percent disability rating and related costs. The court ruled that the defendant insurance company, which insured the vehicle involved, must cover these losses under the compulsory third-party liability policy.
The accident occurred on the evening of June 6, 2011, in a county near Central China City. The defendant, Mr. Sun, was driving a car owned by Mr. Xiao when he struck a tool Ms. Wang was holding while she was processing wheat on a local road. Police determined that Mr. Sun bore primary responsibility for failing to observe properly and driving at an unsafe speed at night, while Ms. Wang was assigned secondary liability. Ms. Wang received outpatient and inpatient treatment at several hospitals and was discharged on July 14, 2011. She had previously sued and obtained a judgment in 2011 for hospital-related costs totaling CNY 50,900, paid by the insurance company.
During the subsequent hearing, Ms. Wang presented a forensic medical evaluation from an accredited center, dated November 10, 2011, which classified her brain injury as a Class 10 disability under China’s disability rating system. She also provided receipts for follow-up medical expenses, transportation costs, and the appraisal fee. The court noted that Mr. Xiao and the insurance company failed to appear at the hearing after being properly summoned, though the case proceeded in their absence. The evidence also included the police accident report, the earlier court judgment, and medical records.
The court found that Mr. Sun, as the driver at fault, was liable for damages. However, because the vehicle was validly insured under a compulsory third-party liability policy, the insurer was required to pay first. The court further held that Mr. Xiao, the vehicle owner, bore no liability because he had lent the car to Mr. Sun, who held a valid driver’s license, and the vehicle had legal registration and roadworthiness. According to relevant tort law, vehicle owners are not liable for accidents caused by a permittee without fault in the lending arrangement.
On legal analysis, the court determined that Ms. Wang’s compensable losses included CNY 313 for follow-up medical treatment, CNY 5,850 for lost wages calculated at CNY 50 per day for 117 days from discharge to the disability assessment date, and CNY 60 for transportation costs—a reduced amount from her claim given the limited need for travel. The court also awarded CNY 8,210 for disability compensation, which was within statutory guidelines. However, it rejected her claim for dependent living expenses on behalf of her husband, Mr. Chen, because she failed to provide evidence that he was incapable of work or lacked other support. The total of CNY 14,433 fell within the insurance policy’s CNY 120,000 limit for personal injury, so Mr. Sun was not required to pay anything beyond the insurance coverage.
This case illustrates the interplay between China’s compulsory auto insurance regime and personal injury litigation. The court reaffirmed that insurers must cover disability and post-discharge losses, while vehicle owners who lend cars to licensed drivers generally escape liability. Plaintiffs seeking dependent support must prove the dependent’s inability to work. The judgment highlights the importance of complete medical records and timely disability assessments in securing full compensation.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.