Insurance Action 69: Are semi trailer and tractor the same vehicle?

2022-05-24 0 By

Insurance Action 69: Are semi trailer and tractor the same vehicle?On August 3, 2018, the tractor spontaneously ignited in the process of parking, resulting in total loss of the tractor itself, damage to the semi-trailer and the container it was towed, and damage to several surrounding cars.In September 2018, Broadcom Logistics And Taiping Property Insurance reached a compensation agreement with a one-time payment of 500,000 yuan, and the contract was terminated.In August 2019, the tractor company compensated the semi-trailer and container company with 250,000 yuan.In 2020, Broadcom Logistics company filed a lawsuit against the insurance company, claiming that the loss of semi trailer and container should be compensated again in the three insurance.Beijing tongzhou district court of trial that fire accident occurs, the tractor and semi-trailer is connected, is one of the two, the two sides could not be each other’s third party, rejected financial court ruled that the second Beijing logistics company litigation, when the tractor and trailer is an organic whole repeatedly but, regardless of other tort only considering both internal relations, each other in between is the possibility of infringement,The trailer is the third party of the tractor;However, the logistics company and the insurance company between the one-time compensation, do not need to pay again.The appeal of the logistics company was rejected and the original judgment upheld.The court of first Instance: The court of first instance held that liability insurance refers to the insurance subject matter of which the insured is liable for compensation to the third party according to law. The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the semi-trailer and the container belong to the “third party”. When the fire accident occurs, the tractor and the semi-trailer are connected, and the two are integrated externally.Internally, although the ownership of the two belong to different subjects, but because they are connected, so that the two parties can not become the other party.The Court of second Instance rejected the Lawsuit of Broadcom Logistics Company: During the second instance, supplementary evidence was submitted: Broadcom Logistics Company and China Pacific Insurance Signed the Lump-sum Payment Agreement for Motor Vehicle Insurance Total Loss (Presumptive Total Loss) Case, which is as follows:The insurance amount of vehicle loss is 507,700 YUAN, and the compensation limit of third party liability insurance is 1,000,000 Yuan. The car was out of danger due to spontaneous combustion of the vehicle on August 3, 2018, and the insured shall take full responsibility. The loss part of the insured vehicle is: the whole vehicle, and the loss amount is 507,700 yuan….Decided to pay the insured a lump sum of RMB (in words) five hundred thousand yuan, ¥500,000.This case one-time closure, insurance liability termination, residual value belongs to the insured.The court holds that there are two controversial focuses in this case: first, whether the trailer is a third party relative to the tractor in the spontaneous combustion accident involved.Secondly, whether CPIC shall be liable under third party liability insurance for the loss of the trailer.I. In the spontaneous combustion accident involved, the trailer is a third party relative to the tractor.After the tractor and trailer are connected as a whole, how the trailer moves completely depends on the tractor. When the tractor and trailer infringe on the other party, they jointly constitute the infringing party and are a whole relative to the infringed party.When the tractor and trailer are connected as a whole but only the internal relationship between the two is considered, there is the possibility of mutual infringement between the two. For example, the tractor manager mismanages the tractor, leading to the loss of the trailer, and vice versa.Right now tortious party has compensation liability to be tortious party, but whether this kind of compensation liability belongs to insurance company compensation liability limits, depend on the agreement of insurance contract.In this case, although the tractor is connected with the trailer during spontaneous combustion, only the relationship between the tractor and the trailer should be considered in the spontaneous combustion accident. In the scope of liability insurance with the tractor as the insured vehicle, the trailer belongs to the third party.The negotiated lump sum payment is concluded, including third party liability insurance.Before signing the agreement with CpIC, Broadcom meda had claimed to cpIC that it should be liable for compensation under the third party liability insurance, and both parties signed the “Lump Sum Payment Agreement for Motor Vehicle Insurance Total Loss (Constructive Total Loss) Case”.According to the above facts, it can be judged that the lump sum compensation of Broadcom Meda and Pacific Insurance includes third party liability insurance.As an operator engaged in the logistics industry for many years, Broadcom Meda should also be able to fully understand the meaning of “one-time closure of the case and termination of insurance liability”.Therefore, the parties have reached an agreement on the amount of indemnity including third party liability insurance, and CpIC has performed the indemnity liability as agreed, so Broadcom Meda’s claim for cpIC’s liability under third party liability insurance shall not be supported.In conclusion, the facts are clearly identified in the judgment of the first instance, but the opinion of the first instance that when the tractor and trailer are connected as a whole, they should not be a third party in the internal relationship is improper, which is corrected by the court.The appeal was dismissed and the verdict upheld.The broker said: to put it simply, the trailer and the tractor belong to the same unit when they are outside;When internally, can mutually tort, whether to belong to insurance company compensation limits, depend on insurance company.In this case, spontaneous combustion of the tractor caused the loss of the semi trailer and the container on board, which should be compensated by the triple insurance of the tractor.However, the two parties have reached an agreement on the compensation for the damage, and the insurance company cannot be asked to compensate again.