诉之合并对审判实践的积极意义——兼评最高人民法院《关于审理交通事故损害赔偿案件司法解释》(征求意见稿)第一条

Positive significance of the mergence of lawsuit for trial practice——Comment on Article 1 of the judicial interpretation of the trial of the traffic accident damages case(draft) of the Supreme Court

在交通事故损害赔偿案件中,通常保险公司参与其中所需承担的责任有两种:一是基于交强险,在交强险限额内承担无过错赔偿责任;二是基于与被保险人签订的保险合同,对被保险人的过错承担赔偿责任。而交强险的法定赔付义务与商业险的合同赔付义务分别属于不同的法律关系,能否进行合并审理在司法实践中一直存在争议。此次最高法于2012年3月21日在其官方网站上发布的《关于审理交通事故损害赔偿案件司法解释》(征求意见稿)第1条从法律依据上解决了上述争议,让本来因为分属不同法律关系而分开审理的两个诉,合并为一个诉进行审理。文章试从实践出发,讨论该条司法解释对司法实践的重要指导意义。

In the case of traffc accident damages, usually the responsibility of an in- surance company involved in two ways： one is based on traffic compulsory insur- ance, the no-fault liability obligations with- in the limits of the Traffic Insurance; the other is based on the contract of insurance signed with the insured, the insured per- son＇s fault liability. The statutory obliga- tions of the traffic compulsory insurance and commercial insurance contract sepa- rately belong to different legal relationships, which has been controversial on whether can be joined in judicial practice. Article 1 of the judicial interpretation of the trial of the traffic accident damages case （draft） of the Supreme Court published on its offcial website on March 21, 2012, settled the dis- pute from the legal basis, so that the two separate trials of different legal relationships could be merged into a trial. The paper started from the practice to discuss the im- port.ant guiding significance of that judicial interpretation for the judicial practice.