Court Rules on Fatal Car Accident Claiming CNY 692,739.90
A court in Eastern China City has ruled on a fatal traffic accident case involving two vehicles, a deceased passenger, and multiple defendants. The plaintiffs, Mr. Fang and Ms. Luo, sought CNY 692,739.90 in damages for the loss of their son, Mr. Fang (the deceased). The court found the two drivers equally at fault and allocated liability between the insurance company, the rental company, the drivers, and the vehicle owner. The final judgment determined that the deceased’s residence classification reduced the compensation amount, and the court subtracted prior payments made by one defendant.
According to the case background, on March 21, 2010, at approximately 1:00 a.m., Mr. Zhang drove a car owned by the Eastern City Car Rental Company along a non-motor vehicle lane. His vehicle collided with a car driven by Mr. He, which was owned by Ms. Zhang. The impact caused Mr. He’s car to roll over, killing the passenger, Mr. Fang, and injuring Mr. He. The traffic police assigned equal responsibility to Mr. Zhang and Mr. He, with no fault attributed to the deceased. The vehicle driven by Mr. He was insured under a compulsory traffic insurance policy with Pacific Insurance Company in Eastern China City. The plaintiffs initially filed a claim for CNY 336,036.90 but later increased it to CNY 692,739.90, including death compensation, funeral expenses, lost income, travel costs, and mental distress damages.
During the court hearing, the plaintiffs presented evidence including a household register, accident report, funeral certificate, settlement agreement, travel receipts, property and land certificates, a court judgment from another city, a police certificate, a residence permit, employment certificates from two service businesses, and a government certificate. The insurance company acknowledged its obligation under the compulsory policy but argued it had already advanced CNY 110,000 to the plaintiffs and objected to the use of urban resident compensation standards. The car rental company stated that the car was under a contractual arrangement with Mr. Zhang. Mr. Zhang confirmed the accident facts and noted he had already paid CNY 75,600 to the plaintiffs, including CNY 55,000 as mental distress compensation. Mr. He and Ms. Zhang argued that the deceased knowingly rode with a drunk driver and that compensation should be based on rural standards.
The court held that the evidence regarding the deceased’s residence was contradictory. The plaintiffs provided a property certificate and court judgment showing the family had lived in a town since 2008, but the deceased’s residence permit indicated an extended stay in another city from January to December 2009. The court found this inconsistency undermined the claim for urban resident status. Employment certificates from service businesses lacked supporting labor contracts or tax records, and a township government certificate was not accepted because such proof must come from police authorities. The court therefore concluded that the deceased did not meet the criteria for urban resident compensation and applied rural standards.
The court’s legal analysis focused on the standard for death compensation. Under relevant Chinese law, compensation for death or injury is calculated based on the victim’s residential status. The burden of proof was on the plaintiffs to show that the deceased had lived in an urban area for one year or more. The evidence presented did not satisfy this requirement due to conflicting dates and insufficient documentation. The court also considered the prior payments. It recognized the settlement agreement between the plaintiffs and Mr. Zhang for CNY 55,000 in mental distress damages, which had been paid. The court reduced the total compensable amount accordingly. The insurance company’s compulsory liability limit was CNY 110,000, which had already been disbursed, so no further payment was required from that policy.
In summary, the court ruled that the plaintiffs were entitled to compensation based on rural standards for death and funeral expenses, plus reasonable travel costs of CNY 8,000, but the mental distress claim was partially satisfied by Mr. Zhang’s payment. The remaining liability was apportioned equally between Mr. Zhang and Mr. He, with Ms. Zhang as the vehicle owner bearing joint liability with Mr. He. The total award was significantly lower than the original claim. This case illustrates the critical importance of providing clear, consistent evidence of urban residence when seeking higher compensation in traffic accident litigation. Discrepancies in supporting documents can lead to application of lower rural standards.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.