Who should bear the loss of business interruption caused by a ride-hailing vehicle being out of service for repairs due to a traffic accident? Recently, the Cuiptrict People's Court of Yibin City, Sichuan Province, concluded a dispute over compensation for business interruption losses arising from a ride-hailing vehicle traffic accident. The cly clarified the boundaries between insurance claims and tort liability, ruling that business interruption losses for commercial vehicles constitute indirect property damage. Consequently, the insurance company was exempt from liability under the cact, and the loss was to be borne by the unit of the tortfeasor.

基本案情

　　In July 2025, Li Mou, an employee of a certain electromechanical company, while performing work duties, drove a company-owned small car and successively col a compliant new energy ride-hailing vehicle driven by Luo Mou and a small car driven by Fu Mou, resulting in varying degrees of damage to all three vehicles with no casualties. Acco the traffic police's accident liability determination, Li Mou bears full responsibility for the accident, while Luo Mou and Fu Mou bear no responsibility.

　　Following the accident, the involved ride-hailing vehicle owned by Luo was sent to the shop for repairs, with an originally scheduled repair period of 27 days. Luo claimed 13,500 yuan for business interruption losses; however, both Li and a certain Electromechanical Company argued that the loss should be compensated by the insurance company and refused to bear the cost themselves. As negotiations failed, Luo filed a lawsuit with the Cuiping District People's Court of Yibin City in October 2025, listing Li and the Electromechanical Company as defendants. During the trial, the court legally added the insurance company, which had underwritten the compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party liability insurance for the offending vehicle, as a co-defendant, and Luo requested that all parties jointly bear the liability for compensation for the business interruption losses.

　　During the trial, a certain electromechanical company argued that the involved vehicle was insured with Compulsory Traffic Insurance (CTI) and Comme Third-Party Liability Insurance, and that the loss of operation was a property loss caused by the traffic accident, which should be compensated by the insurance company within the limits of insurance liability.nsurer underwriting the CTI submitted insurance terms arguing that the statutory compensation scope of CTI is limited to personal injury and direct property loss, and that loss of operation falls under irect loss of expected profits, which is not covered by CTI. The insurer underwriting the Commercial Third-Party Liability Insurance submitted the application form, the applicant's declaration, and the standaurance terms, arguing that the commercial insurance terms explicitly list losses of operation and other indirect losses as exclusions; furthermore, the insurer had fulfilled its obligation to provide notice and clear explanation rhe exclusion clauses to the applicant, the certain electromechanical company, who had confirmed this by affixing its official seal on the declaration, rendering the exclusion clauses legally valid aelieving the insurer of the obligation to compensate.

法院审理

　　Upon review, the court ascertained that combining the vehicle repair work order (admission date: July 5, 2025; settt date: July 31, 2025) with the ride-hailing platform's operational transaction records (indicating that Luo Mou resumed operations and generated revenu on July 30, 2025), and deducting the invalid operational period on the day of the accident and the days the vehicle resumed operation ahead of schedule, the reasonable numbef suspension for the involved vehicle was legally determined to be 24.5 days. Referring to the platform's actual operational transaction records for the three months prior to the accdent (April–June 2025) submitted by Luo Mou, his average daily gross operating income was calculated to be 362.95 yuan. After deductinged operating costs of 80 yuan for tolls and 30 yuan for electricity, and taking into account the average profit level of the local ride-hailing industry, the courtermined his average daily net profit to be 245 yuan. Consequently, Luo Mou's reasonable loss due to suspension was finally determined to be ,002.5 yuan.

　　Regarding the determination of the party liable, the court made a finding based on the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases on Compensation for Damages Caused by Road Traffic Accidents (Amended in 2020)" and other relevant legal provisions:Losses from the suspension of operation of commercial vehicles constitute indirect property losses and loss of expected profits, and are not within the statutory compensation scope of Compulsory TraffInsurance or the agreed compensation scope of the contract; the commercial third-party liability insurance company has fulfilled its legal obligations to prompt and clearly explain the exemption clauses, which have been confhe signature or seal of the insured, rendering the exemption clauses effective; therefore, neither insurance company bears the liability for compensation for the suspension of operation losses；

      At the time of the incident, Li was performing his official duties; according to relevant provisions of the Civil 

Code, the liability for tort damages caused by his official ies shall be borne by his employer, a certain 

Electromechanical Company.

     In summary, the court rendered a judgment in accordance with the law, ordering the Electromechanical 

Company tmpensate Luo for the loss of earnings totaling 6,002.5 yuan. After the first-instance judgment was 

rendered, none of the parties appealed, and the judgment hacome legally effective.

法官提醒

　　Owners of commercial vehicles shall legally obtain complete operating qualifications. In the event of a traffic accident, they should retain key evidence such as repair work ordeof of repair duration, platform operating records, and receipts for daily operating costs to establish the duration of suspension and income basis, thereby avoiding claim obstacles due to insufficient evidence. When purchasing motor vehice insurance, the policyholder should carefully review the insurance terms, focusing on core content such as exclusions and coverage scope. For unclear clauses, the policyholder may request the insurer to in them item by item and retain records of communication for reference.

　　Insurance companies shall strictly fulfill their statutory obligations to provide notice and clear explanation regarding standard exemption clauses, standardize the retention of materials such as the applicant'slaration and signature, and supporting records of clarification, to ensure the legality and validity of the exemption clauses. Parties involved in accidents should adhere to the principles of good faith and rationalitlve disputes through prior negotiation; if negotiation fails, they may protect their rights through litigation, and the People's Courts shall accurately define legal liabilities and equally protect the legitimate rights and inte all parties.