In daily travel, electric bicycles have become the first choice for many citizens due to their convenience and flexibility. But illegal behaviors such as driving in the wrong direction and distracted driving are also common. Many drivers still have a legal misconception: they believe that as long as there is no actual collision between the two vehicles, they do not have to bear the responsibility for the accident. Is that really the case? The recent case heard by Beijing No.2 Intermediate People's Court has sounded the alarm for us.

On the evening of March 14, 2026, on a non motorized lane on a certain road in Beijing, Xiao Li rode an electric bicycle and turned from south to west while driving in the opposite direction, while Xiao Wang rode an electric bicycle and drove from west to east while drunk. Xiao Wang discovered a reversing vehicle and applied emergency brakes. During the process, the vehicle lost control and overturned, injuring Xiao Wang and causing damage to the vehicle. According to the "Road Traffic Accident Identification Letter (Simplified Procedure)" issued by the traffic police department, Xiao Li is found to be primarily responsible and Xiao Wang is found to be secondary responsible. The accident caused a fracture of Xiao Wang's left cheekbone and arch, requiring hospitalization and surgical treatment, resulting in losses such as medical expenses and lost wages. Later, Xiao Wang filed a lawsuit with the court, demanding that Xiao Li compensate for various losses totaling over 39000 yuan at a rate of 70%. Xiao Li believes that he did not have any contact with the other party, and Xiao Wang's fall was caused by his own careless driving, and he should bear the responsibility on his own.

After trial, Beijing No.2 Intermediate People's Court believes that the dispute in this case lies in the issue of fault and liability in the "non-contact" traffic accident.

Xiao Li advocates that there was no physical collision between the vehicles driven by both parties, and that Xiao Wang's multiple faults such as distraction were the main cause of his fall and injury. Xiao Wang himself should bear all or primary responsibility. But the court believes that Article 119, Paragraph 5 of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that "traffic accident" refers to an event in which a vehicle causes personal injury or property damage on the road due to fault or accident. According to the above regulations, "contact" is not a constituent element of a traffic accident, so the absence of any physical collision between the vehicles driven by both parties does not exempt Xiao Li from liability in the traffic accident. At the same time, based on the surveillance footage obtained by the court at the time of the accident, and combined with the "Road Traffic Accident Determination Letter", it can be determined that Xiao Li's fault behavior of driving a non motorized vehicle in the opposite direction was the main cause of Xiao Wang's fall. Ultimately, the court determined that Xiao Li was responsible for 70% of Xiao Wang's losses and Xiao Wang was responsible for 30% of the compensation on his own.

This article is transferred from the WeChat official account "Shandong Gaofa". Thank you!