Minor Plaintiff Awarded CNY 2,745.72 in Truck Accident
A court in Southern China City has ordered a truck driver to pay damages to a minor plaintiff who was injured when a metal plate fell from the defendant’s vehicle during a road encounter. The court found the driver fully at fault and calculated the compensation using the applicable local standards, awarding a total of CNY 2,745.72 for medical support, care, travel, and emotional distress.
The plaintiff, a minor child represented by his parents, Mr. Liang and Ms. Qin, was a passenger on a motorcycle driven by his father. On the afternoon of April 22, 2011, the motorcycle was traveling in one direction while the defendant, Ms. Mo, drove a light truck in the opposite direction. The truck had been modified with an iron plate to raise its sides. As the two vehicles passed each other, the plate detached and struck the plaintiff, causing injuries. The plaintiff was taken by ambulance to a local hospital, where he stayed for 21 days. The traffic police determined that the defendant bore full responsibility for the accident. Although the defendant had paid the plaintiff’s hospital medical expenses, she refused to cover other losses. The plaintiff’s legal representatives filed a claim for CNY 4,306.80, including meal subsidy, caregiver lost wages, transportation costs, lost wages for family members handling the accident, and solatium.
During the hearing, the plaintiff submitted a household registration booklet, identification documents, the traffic accident liability determination, and medical records with expense receipts. The defendant acknowledged the accident, the liability finding, the hospitalization period, and the paid medical costs, but disputed the amounts claimed for other damages. Specifically, the defendant argued that the caregiver fee was calculated using the wrong year’s standard, that transportation costs lacked receipts, that handling fees lacked legal basis, and that solatium was not properly requested in the initial claim. The defendant did not present any evidence to support her objections.
The court examined the evidence and confirmed the undisputed facts. The key issue was whether the amounts claimed for each item complied with legal standards. Applying the relevant judicial interpretation on personal injury compensation, the court held that the 2011 local standard for the agricultural sector should apply because the plaintiff’s family income derived from that sector. The court recalculated the items: meal subsidy for 21 days at the standard rate remained CNY 840; caregiver lost wages were set at CNY 1,015.56 (21 days at CNY 48.36 per day); lost wages for two family members handling the accident over three occasions were set at CNY 290.16 (2 persons x 3 times x CNY 48.36). Regarding transportation, the court noted that the caregiver and the plaintiff necessarily traveled between their home and the hospital. Without receipts, the court exercised discretion and allowed CNY 100 for five person-trips. For solatium, the court acknowledged that the minor plaintiff suffered emotional harm from the injury and hospitalization, but found the harm not severe enough to warrant the requested CNY 2,000. The court reduced it to CNY 500.
The court based its decision on the Tort Liability Law and the Supreme People’s Court interpretations on personal injury and mental damages. It emphasized that the calculation of lost wages and care costs must follow the official local standards for the year of the accident. The court also noted that solatium can be awarded even if not explicitly requested in the initial claim, as long as the injury caused emotional distress. However, the amount must be proportionate to the severity of the harm. By adjusting each item to reflect actual need and legal limits, the court arrived at a total of CNY 2,745.72. The defendant was ordered to pay this amount within 20 days of the judgment taking effect, with additional interest for delayed payment as prescribed by civil procedure law. The court dismissed the remainder of the plaintiff’s claim and assigned the nominal case filing fee to the defendant.
This case illustrates how courts in China assess damages in motor vehicle accidents involving minors, particularly when the defendant admits liability but disputes the quantum. The ruling confirms that judges have discretion to adjust claims based on evidence and applicable standards, even when specific receipts are missing. It also highlights that solatium for a child’s injury may be granted at a modest level unless serious consequences are shown. Parties should note that timely enforcement of such judgments is available within two years from the last performance date. Overall, the decision provides a clear example of the structured calculation of personal injury compensation under Chinese tort law.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.