In the event of a traffic accident, the perpetrator proposed to re-evaluate the disability level on the grounds that the victim had cervical spondylosis. How did the court judge？

2025年11月2日 | admin | A1
Referee standard
Although the victim’s personal physique has a certain influence on the occurrence of damage consequences, it is an objective fact and has no legal causal relationship with the consequences caused by the accident, and the victim’s personal physique does not belong to his own fault, so he should not bear the corresponding responsibility because his personal physique has a certain influence on the disability caused by traffic accidents.
01
Case facts
In January 2019, while driving a vehicle, Li collided with Peng, who was driving a non-motor vehicle, causing Peng to be injured. The traffic police detachment issued a road traffic accident certificate, which determined that Li was mainly responsible for the accident and Peng was responsible for the accident. The vehicle involved in the accident was insured by A Insurance Company for compulsory insurance and three-person insurance. The judicial expertise center appraised Peng’s degree of disability, and the appraisal conclusion was: Peng was disabled at grade 9 due to a traffic accident. Peng Mou sued the court, requesting to order A Insurance Company to pay its medical expenses and other related expenses within the compulsory insurance and three-person insurance, and Li was liable for the excess.During the trial, both the defendant Li and the insurance company applied for participation appraisal of Peng’s neck disability grade on the grounds of "cervical degeneration and disc herniation".
02
Focus of controversy
In this case, the parties mainly disputed whether Peng’s personal physique problem with cervical spondylosis should be identified by injury participation and whether the infringer’s responsibility should be reduced with reference to the proportion of injury participation.
Referee result
The court held through trial that,The reasons why the defendant Li and A Insurance Company demanded to reduce the defendant’s civil liability on the grounds that the plaintiff Peng had cervical degeneration and disc herniation could not be established.
In the tort liability disputes caused by traffic accidents, whether the infringer’s compensation liability should be reduced by referring to the factors of injury participation should return to the essence of the identification of tort liability in traffic accidents, that is, whether it meets the constitutive requirements of tort, especially whether there is fault and legal causality. Without affecting the elements of tort, damage participation is not a legal situation to reduce the infringer’s liability for compensation.
First, the degree of injury participation can determine that the individual’s physical condition or original disease has a certain proportion of influence on the occurrence of injury consequences, but it is not the same as the mistakes stipulated by the Tort Liability Law and other laws. The physical condition of the victim Peng is an objective condition of his body. Peng has neither intention nor gross negligence in the occurrence of the damage result.Although Peng’s personal physical condition of cervical degeneration and disc herniation objectively exists and has certain influence on the occurrence of damage consequences, it does not belong to the situation that the victim himself is at fault as stipulated in the Tort Liability Law.The victim’s personal physique or original disease is only the objective factor of the consequences of the accident. If the victim is not at fault for the occurrence or expansion of the damage, there is no legal situation to reduce or exempt the liability of the offender.
Second, Peng has no legal causal relationship with the occurrence of traffic accidents and the identification of damage consequences in this case because of his own cervical degenerative diseases and disc herniation.Peng should not bear the corresponding responsibility because his physical condition has certain influence on the disability caused by traffic accidents.
Theoretical expansion
First, what is injury participation?
"Injury participation" is a concept of forensic medicine, which refers to the proportional relationship between injuries and diseases (including aging and physical differences) that jointly affect human health and damage human health. In the event of personal injury, if an individual dies, or physical injury or mental injury occurs due to the effect of secondary symptoms and complications caused by injury or injury (called injury-related injury and illness), it is determined whether the injury behavior or physical difference is the cause or correlation degree of the final damage consequence through the identification of injury participation.
In 1980, Professor Fujio Watanabe of Japan used the method of quantitative proportion to study traffic accidents and damage results (death, legacy obstacles), and put forward the concept of "accident contribution degree" to determine the role of accidents in damage results. In 1986, the concept of "accident contribution degree" was introduced to the forensic science field in China, and the term was changed to "injury participation degree" in the forensic science field in China.
Second, what is the eggshell head rule?
In common law countries, there is an important rule in dealing with personal injury compensation disputes, namely the "eggshell head" rule. This rule assumes that someone’s head is as thin as an egg shell, and a blow that does not harm ordinary people does fatal harm to that person. According to the "eggshell head" rule, a person whose head is as thin as an egg shell cannot legally take more risks than normal people because of the fragility of his own head, and it cannot be a reason for confrontation after others damage his health. The rule of "eggshell head" originated from a precedent in England. The judge held that the victim’s head can’t be assumed to be normal rather than extremely thin because of negligence, and the degree of damage may be lower, so as to resist the victim’s claim for compensation. The rule of "eggshell head" pays attention to protecting the victim, making the victim get full treatment and warning the perpetrator. Any act of hurting people may lead to the most serious injury, and the perpetrator will bear all the compensation responsibilities. The "eggshell head" rule has been gradually established in the trial practice of many countries, such as the United States and Britain, that is, the victim should not take higher risks than ordinary people for his own defects or his own old diseases.
The "eggshell head" rule has not directly entered the current legal provisions of our country, but it is determined according to the Tort Liability Law of our country.The principle of fault liability, the traffic accident victim’s own defects or old diseases are not at fault for the occurrence of damage consequences, and this cannot be used as a reason to determine that the victim is at fault or to reduce the liability of the infringer.
■ Source: Hengyang Railway Transport Court
■ Author: Liu Denghui
●Divorce, how to divide the house? The judge gave a calculation formula!
●Dissatisfied with driving in and out of the community to register, the owner took the property to court! The court ruled so!
●The developer promised "no reason to return a house", so can the matching parking spaces be refunded? The court ruled so!
●How to prove that husband and wife are jointly indebted?
●The wife suddenly became seriously ill, and the husband was drunk and sent to the hospital for investigation. Is it necessary to bear criminal responsibility? The court ruled this way!
●Attention! "Divorce Agreement" These problems are the easiest to ignore! If you don’t agree, you will regret it!
Point sharing
Click like
Reporting/feedback