Whether the tort debt of Ningbo spouse belongs to the joint debt of husband and wife.
Mr. Wang was ordered by the court to compensate the victim for the damage caused by the traffic accident during his marriage. After the judgment became effective, the victim also sued Mr. Wang’s wife, seeking to hold her jointly and severally liable for the compensation. Similar questions arise repeatedly in the context of divorce and debt intersection: the debt owed by one spouse's infringement, the other party should pay it back together? The conclusion first says: the debt of one spouse due to the tort is in principle a personal debt, and the spouse is not jointly liable for liquidation; however, if the tort is caused by the common interest of the family or the husband and wife living together, and the spouse benefits from it, it may be recognized as a joint debt of the husband and wife, and the spouse shall bear the responsibility within the scope of the benefit. The key to judgment is not "whether it happened after marriage", but "whether the infringement is related to family life and whether the spouse benefits".
1. tort debt belongs to personal debt in principle: legal logic and basis
Article 1,064 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China stipulates: Debts incurred by both spouses through a joint expression of intent, such as when both sign together or when one spouse subsequently ratifies the debt, as well as debts incurred by one spouse in their own name during the subsistence of the marriage for the needs of daily family life, shall be regarded as joint debts of the spouses. Debts incurred by one spouse in their own name during the subsistence of the marriage that exceed the needs of daily family life shall not be considered joint debts of the spouses; however, this does not apply if the creditor can prove that the debt was used for the common life of the spouses, for their joint production and business activities, or was based on a joint expression of intent by both spouses.
If this article is applied to the tort debt, three elements can be separated: first, the debt must be linked by "the joint intention of husband and wife" or "used in the daily life of the family" or "used in the joint life of husband and wife, joint production and operation" to connect the spouses; second, the formation of tort debt is based on the personal behavior of the tortfeasor, with obvious personal specificity, usually does not meet any of the above ties; third, in the distribution of the burden of proof, in addition to the debt within the scope of daily family affairs, the party (usually the creditor) who advocates the establishment of the joint debt of the husband and wife must prove that the debt is related to the joint life of the husband and wife, joint production and operation. Tort liability pays attention to "who infringes, who is responsible", the perpetrator must be responsible to the victim with his own property, which is different from the logic of the contract debt "first consensual, later debt"-the spouse did not participate in the tort, nor did he make the intention to bear the debt, let it bear the tort liability of others out of thin air, lack of legal and normative basis.
In practice, it is also necessary to distinguish two types of debts: contractual debts (borrowing, buying and selling, etc.) take the expression of both parties' intentions and the use of funds as the core examination, while tort debts (traffic accidents, personal injury, property damage) take "the relevance of tort and family interests" as the core examination. It is also the husband's debt, the private loan of 500000 yuan is not necessarily a common debt, and the husband's judgment of 800000 yuan is not necessarily a common debt. However, the compensation liability arising from the accident caused by the husband's driving and operating truck (the income is used for the family) is most likely to be recognized as a common debt-the difference lies in whether the debt is embedded in the common life and common interests of the family.
2. Detailed breakdown of exceptions: Under what circumstances must the spouse also pay compensation?
Infringement debt is identified as joint debt of husband and wife. In practice, it mainly occurs in the following situations, which can be compared item by item:
- The infringing act serves the common interests of the family.. For example, the vehicle is registered under the name of husband and wife and is mainly used for daily purposes such as transporting children to and from school, family travel, shopping and shopping. One party drives the vehicle to cause harm. The infringement scene is highly related to the daily life of the family. The court may determine that the debt is used for the daily needs of the family, thus supporting the victim to ask the spouse to share the burden.
- Operating income is attributable to the family living together. One of the spouses is engaged in transportation, freight, online car, individual business operations, etc., the operating income is used for joint family expenses, infringement occurs in the course of operation (e. g. damage in transit, injury to customers in the store), the infringement debt is linked to "joint production and operation", the spouse may bear joint responsibility.
- Husband and wife participate in business activities together to cause harm. For example, if a husband and wife jointly operate a restaurant or workshop, and a safety accident in the business premises causes damage, both parties are the main business entities, and the liability for compensation naturally falls on the common property.
- The spouses later ratify or jointly deal. After the infringement occurs, the spouses come forward to sign a compensation agreement, promise to compensate on their behalf, jointly issue IOUs, etc., which constitute a common intention and can be converted into a common debt.
In contrast, the following situations usually still belong to personal debts: tort debts caused by intentional crimes (such as intentional injury and drunken driving); debts caused by gross negligence infringement and irrelevant to family life; debts completely occurring in personal social and entertainment occasions; debts unrelated to family property such as personal reputation infringement and personal network speech infringement. Intentional crime and gross negligence have a strong subjective and personal color, even if the time of the act is in marriage, the spouse can not foresee and prevent, judicial practice generally does not include it in the joint debt.
3. Key points of review and evidence chain for tort liability arising from traffic accidents
Traffic accident cases are the most common type of tort liability and also the one most likely to give rise to disputes over whether the resulting debt constitutes joint marital debt. The review typically focuses on three sets of facts:
First, vehicle attributes and usage records. The name in which the vehicle is registered, the source of the purchase money, who the insurance policyholder is, and who uses the vehicle for a long time directly reflect the degree of connection between the vehicle and the family. Second, the infringement scene. The purpose of the vehicle at the time of the accident-whether it is a family trip, pick up and drop off the family, or a personal trip, or an operation to pull goods-determines whether the infringement falls into the category of "family daily life" or "joint production and operation. Third, the source of compensation and family benefits. Whether the family receives income from the operation of the vehicle and whether it is possible to use the joint property of the husband and wife to pay off the compensation.
At the level of evidence, it is usually necessary to collect: accident responsibility certificate (issued by the traffic police department, indicating the accident process and responsibility division); vehicle driving license, registration information, car purchase and insurance certificate; vehicle usage records (navigation records, traffic records, freight documents, expressions about car use in chat records); source and flow of household expenses (proving that business income enters the family or has nothing to do with the family); proof of work and income of one spouse. If the victim seeks to hold the spouse jointly liable, they must provide evidence that the tortious act conferred a benefit on the family; the mere existence of the marital relationship is insufficient to impose liability on the spouse.
4. boundary conditions and special handling of execution phase
Even if the tort debt is identified as personal debt, it may still affect the spouse's rights and interests in the execution stage: the share of the joint property of the husband and wife belonging to the spouse cannot be executed as a whole because of the personal debt of one party. In practice, after the court seals up and freezes the joint property of the husband and wife, the spouse may raise an objection to the execution according to the the People's Republic of China Civil Procedure Law, requiring the division of the common property and the reservation of his or her own share. If the spouse is listed as the executed person and the joint debt is determined on the basis of the execution and the spouse thinks that the determination is wrong, he or she can be relieved through the execution objection, the execution objection by the outsider or even the trial supervision procedure. Therefore, the spouse who is held accountable must follow up the whole process, rather than waiting until the property has been withheld before claiming the right.
In addition, it should be noted that the divorce agreement or divorce judgment stipulates that "the debt shall be borne by one party", which only solves the final sharing and recovery problems within the husband and wife, and cannot oppose the bona fide creditors; after one party pays off the debt, it can recover the debt from the other party according to the agreement or judgment. If the debt sharing is not handled at the time of divorce, it may also be claimed separately after the divorce.
5. example deduction and litigation operation list
In order to facilitate the understanding of the review standard, the following three groups of comparative scenes (examples, fictions) show how different conclusions can be drawn from similar facts: Scene 1, the husband drives the family car to pick up the child, causing serious injuries, the car is registered in the name of both husband and wife, and the family buys insurance-the accident happens in the scene of daily use of the family, and the victim claims that the spouse should share it, the court will combine the vehicle attributes, use records and insurance information review, and there is room for common debt. Scene 2, the husband hit a person while driving under the influence of alcohol content in his blood has reached the standard of drunk driving-the behavior is suspected of dangerous driving, which is an intentional crime or gross negligence. Even if it occurs within marriage, judicial practice generally recognizes it as personal debt and the spouse is not responsible. Scene 3, the transportation company jointly operated by the husband and wife causes an accident during the operation of the vehicle, and the operating income is used for family life-here the main responsibility of the company is intertwined with the joint production and operation responsibility of the husband and wife, and if the company's property is mixed with the family property, the spouse may bear the corresponding responsibility based on the joint production and operation. The differences between the three sets of scenarios focus on one point: the closer the tort is to the "common interest of the family", the higher the likelihood that the spouse will be implicated.
When the spouse is sued, the following materials can be prepared one by one: ① Accident liability certificate and insurance claims materials (issued by the traffic police and insurance company);② Vehicle driving license, purchase and insurance payment certificate (to prove the source and attribute of the vehicle);③ Daily use records of the vehicle (navigation, traffic, freight documents, and chat records of the vehicle);④ The source of household expenses flows (to prove that the family is not dependent on the cause of the accident or related business income);⑤ The list of the spouse's personal income and family assets (to prove that the family is capable of operating independently). The victim adds: evidence of the link between the act and the family living together, evidence that the family of the perpetrator benefited from it, and evidence of the spouse's knowledge or participation in the process.
The procedure and time point should also be known in mind: submit the defense within 15 days after receiving the copy of the complaint, and at the same time submit written opinions claiming that the debt has nothing to do with yourself and apply to the court to find out the nature of the debt; if you are not satisfied with the judgment of the first instance, you should appeal within 15 days from the date of delivery of the judgment; if you think that your share in the common property has been executed as a whole after entering the execution, promptly raise objections to execution and prepare materials for analysis; if it is believed that the basis for execution is wrong, it shall be relieved through trial supervision and other procedures. It is far better to break through the dispute of "debt nature" at the litigation stage than to remedy it at the enforcement stage.
6. Insurance Order and Liability Allocation in Tort Compensation
in the discussion of traffic accident tort debt, the order of insurance compensation is often ignored, but it directly affects "who pays the money in the end". According to the current rules, the insurance company that underwrites the compulsory insurance shall first pay within the liability limit (death and disability, medical expenses, property loss sub-limits), and the insufficient part shall be paid by the commercial three-party insurance according to the terms of the insurance, and the person responsible for the infringement shall bear the deficiency. In other words, only the balance beyond the scope of compulsory insurance and commercial insurance compensation will really fall into the debt dispute of the infringer and his spouse-if the victim sues the insurance company as the defendant, the court will first determine the insurance compensation in the trial, and then determine the liability of the responsible person and his spouse on the balance.
For spouses, this order has double meanings: on the one hand, the compensation within the insurance coverage does not constitute "actual family debt", and the victim cannot claim to pay off the spouse together because the insurance has not been paid; on the other hand, if the family fully insures the vehicle causing the accident, the insurance type is reasonable, and the actual gap of the infringement debt is controllable, the intensity of the dispute of "joint debt" will also decline. It is recommended that the family car insurance when the full configuration of strong insurance and commercial insurance, which is the lowest cost of risk isolation. In addition, if multiple infringers jointly cause harm, each shall bear its share of responsibility according to the proportion of fault. The spouse shall only discuss whether it constitutes a joint debt within the scope of responsibility of the infringer's own share, and shall not expand his own liability due to the infringement share of others.
7. FAQ
Does the wife have to compensate when the husband hits someone while driving drunk?
Generally not necessary. Drunk driving is a crime of intentional or gross negligence. The infringement has nothing to do with the daily life of the family. Judicial practice generally recognizes it as personal debt. If the accident occurs on the way to perform family affairs and the circumstances are minor, it needs to be judged in combination with specific evidence, but the possibility of the spouse being identified as sharing the burden in the case of drunk driving is very low.
Should the husband be held responsible for the accident when the wife drove the family car to pick up the children?
There is room for common debt to be identified. The family car accident and the accident occurred in the daily use of the family scene, may fall into the scope of "debt for the daily needs of the family", the court will combine the vehicle registration, use records, insurance and other comprehensive judgment. It is recommended to keep car use records and household expense vouchers and rationally evaluate response strategies.
If the victim only sues the infringer himself, can he sue his spouse again?
can claim separately, but it needs to bear the burden of proof to prove that the tort debt meets the identification requirements of the joint debt of husband and wife. In practice, the victim usually lists the spouse as a co-defendant in the prosecution, and the court also identifies the nature of the debt in the trial.
The tort compensation has been paid with the joint property of the husband and wife, can the spouse get his or her part back?
If the debt is finally identified as personal debt, but is paid off with common property, the spouse can claim that the settlement should be made up by the personal property of the infringing party when the divorce is divided, or deal with the compensation and recovery arrangement together in the divorce proceedings, so as to avoid "personal debt hollowing out common property".
8. Practical Insights from a Lawyer
If one party bumped or injured someone, whether the spouse should compensate together or not, the key to judge is not whether there is this relationship in marriage, but whether this infringement is related to family life and whether the spouse has benefited from it. The tort has a personal exclusivenature, in principle, who is responsible for the infringement, with his own property to pay off. Therefore, the people on the defendant's side should not panic about reconciliation as soon as they receive the notice, and first clarify whether this debt has anything to do with me.
There are several evidences to pay special attention to when dealing with traffic accidents.The purpose of the vehicle is one end, depending on whether it is shared by the family or the other party's personal affairs, and whether the purpose of driving the vehicle is to do family affairs and run business. The order of insurance is another head. The compulsory insurance and commercial insurance will be paid first, and the part that can take the insurance should not fall on the family property. In addition, we should also keep an eye on the flow of funds and income to see if the other party's behavior has brought income to the family. What spouses have to do is to sort out the facts that they have not participated, benefited, and made no joint decisions, instead of saying in general that they don't know anything.
When it comes to the stage of divorce and execution, two things should be laid out in advance. First, the divorce agreement clearly states the ownership of the tort debt, which shall be borne by whom, and do not vaguely include it. Second, if the common property is sealed up as a whole at the execution stage, the spouse can keep his share by analyzing the property and raising objections, instead of passively accepting it together. When negotiating, the debt itself is a bargaining chip that can be exchanged: if the other party wants you to cooperate on the debt and doesn't want to write it too clearly, then he has to make room for the division of property and the arrangement of maintenance.
Whether the tort debt belongs to the joint debt of husband and wife, the core review standard is "whether the tort is embedded in the family's common life, joint production and operation, whether the spouse is informed to benefit", rather than "whether it occurs in marriage". For one of the parties in the marriage relationship, records of the source of family expenses, the main use of the vehicle, etc. should be kept on a daily basis, and the victim should actively respond to the lawsuit, advocate personal debt defense, and avoid passive waiting. In either capacity, it is recommended that the nature of the debt be addressed at the front end: it is much less costly to address the controversy over "whether or not there is a common debt" in litigation at the time of litigation than to remedy it at the enforcement stage afterwards. In the event of divorce, debt sharing, recovery and compensation arrangements should be dealt with together in an agreement or litigation.