道路交通事故认定及救济问题研究

发布时间：2018-06-22 09:54

本文选题：事故认定 + 责任认定书　；参考：《烟台大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：交通事故认定是对事故成因的分析,是公安交警部门对事故当事人各方有无违章行为及违章行为与事故损害后果之间因果关系的定性和定量描述,其本身并不确定当事人之间的实体法律权利和义务;事故认定行为大致经历了“可诉-不可诉-可诉-不可诉”四个阶段,正是因为事故认定具有很强的专业性,使得当事人和法院很难否认和推翻交警的认定结果,这样客观上就会使得当事人对交通事故认定不服处于一种无法律救济的窘况状态,因而产生了一系列负面问题,客观上就会造成一些社会矛盾隐患。笔者认为,交通事故认定是一种行政确认行为,应属于具体行政行为;认定事故责任的书面载体是事故认定书,其法律属性是书证,是一种行政公文书证。必须承认事故认定书具有证据能力,而且证明力还很强,但对于人民法院而言,它不是进行民事损害赔偿的当然依据。允许当事人就其作为证据的可靠性、真实性和科学性提出质疑,如确有其它充分证据证明,对其真实性存疑,可以推翻其作为有效证据使用。法院认为事故认定书所确认的事实确有疏漏或责任划分明显不当,可以不予采信;笔者积极提出并探索对事故认定不服的有效救济途径,只有严格将事故认定置于法律监督之下,加强对事故认定行为的法律审查,从源头上改善救济途径单一的现象,才能减少讼累、方能使当事人各方息讼服判,才利于生效裁判文书的履行,从而有效维护社会的稳定。
[Abstract]:Traffic accident identification is an analysis of the cause of the accident, and a qualitative and quantitative description by the public security traffic police department of whether or not the parties involved in the accident have violated the regulations and whether there is a causal relationship between the violations and the consequences of the accident damage. It itself does not determine the substantive legal rights and obligations between the parties; the identification of the accident has generally gone through four stages of "actionable-non-actionable", which is precisely because of the strong professional nature of the accident determination. It makes it very difficult for the parties and the court to deny and overturn the findings of the traffic police. This objectively makes the parties dissatisfied with the identification of traffic accidents in an awkward state of no legal remedy, thus creating a series of negative problems. Objectively will cause some social contradictions hidden danger. The author thinks that the identification of traffic accident is an administrative confirmation act, which should belong to the specific administrative act; the written carrier of identifying the accident responsibility is the accident identification document, and its legal attribute is the documentary evidence and a kind of administrative document certificate. It must be admitted that the accident cognizance document has the evidence ability, and the proof power is also very strong, but to the people's court, it is not the natural basis for the civil damage compensation. The parties are allowed to question the reliability, authenticity and scientific nature of the evidence. If there is sufficient evidence to prove it, if it is doubtful about its authenticity, it can be overturned as effective evidence. The court held that the facts confirmed in the accident cognizance document were indeed negligent or that the division of responsibility was obviously improper and could not be accepted; the author actively proposed and explored an effective remedy for disagreeing with the identification of the accident. Only by strictly placing the accident determination under the supervision of the law, strengthening the legal review of the act of identifying the accident, and improving the phenomenon of a single remedy from the source, can we reduce the burden of litigation and enable the parties concerned to order litigation and judgment. Only in order to effectively maintain the stability of the society.
【学位授予单位】：烟台大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.14

【参考文献】