, http://www.sswoo.com/un22274268; [Case Details] On March 21st, 2008, Li Mou, the driver hired by Zhang Mou, was driving Zhang's truck to deliver goods. During the journey, Li’s vehicle collided with Wen Mou's car, causing damage to Wen's car. Zhang spent 8,000 yuan to repair it. The traffic police issued an accident liability determination letter stating that Li was mainly responsible. Zhang believed that Li drove too carelessly, resulting in him unjustly spending 8,000 yuan. Therefore, he demanded that Li compensate him 3,000 yuan.
[Disagreement] Can the car owner exercise recourse rights when a hired driver is mainly responsible for a traffic accident?
The first opinion is that since Li is Zhang's employee and bears significant negligence in this accident, Zhang can seek compensation from Li.
The second opinion is that although the traffic accident responsibility determination book states that Li is mainly responsible, this main responsibility cannot simply be equated with gross negligence. Therefore, Zhang cannot seek compensation from Li.
[Analysis] I agree with the second opinion. In this case, if one merely relies on the administrative responsibilities determined by the traffic accident determination book to divide civil faults, it would be incorrect. Zhang's primary basis for demanding civil liability from Li is the traffic accident determination book, which determines that driver Li is mainly responsible for the accident. I believe that the traffic accident determination book is merely an administrative determination of the traffic accident and not a basis for civil compensation responsibility.
The responsibility in the accident determination book and gross negligence in civil law are two different legal concepts and should not be conflated. The responsibility stated in the accident determination book cannot prove that Li had gross negligence subjectively during the driving process. The division of responsibilities in the accident determination book usually refers to "one party," which actually includes the mixed responsibilities of the driver and the car owner. It cannot be one-sidedly understood as the sole responsibility of the driver. Therefore, in this case, we cannot simply rely on the fact that Li is mainly responsible to demand that he compensates Zhang for his losses.
Shandong Lawyer Network: http://sdlvshi.org/