On the evening of May 13, 2025, hail with a diameter of over 3 centimeters rose from underground in Beijing, accompanied by maximum instantaneous wind speeds of up to 10 levels. A large number of vehicles were urgently parked on the lanes under overpasses to avoid the hail, causing severe congestion on multiple traffic arteries, with the longest traffic jam lasting more than 2 hours. This incident has sparked widespread public discussion on the legal boundaries of emergency avoidance.

The constituent elements of emergency avoidance include:

The urgency of real danger is a prerequisite for emergency avoidance. The danger must be 'real and happening', not hypothetical or predicted. In the Beijing hail incident, hail with a diameter of more than 3 centimeters accompanied by strong winds did pose an immediate threat to the safety of vehicles and drivers, and this danger is objective and urgent.

The necessity of avoidance behavior. The risk avoidance measures must be taken as a last resort, and the perpetrator has no other reasonable choice. When encountering extreme weather conditions on the road, vehicles can take refuge in nearby underground parking lots, gas station canopies, or service areas, and drivers should prioritize these areas; Temporary under bridge parking may only be considered a 'last resort' when these options are not available. In the hail incident in Beijing, parking under the bridge was difficult to meet the "necessity" requirement.

3. Balancing interests is the most complex judgment point for emergency avoidance. The law requires emergency avoidance that the interests preserved must be significantly greater than the interests harmed. In the hail incident in Beijing, when drivers parked on the down lane of an overpass for self-protection caused vehicles far exceeding the number of parked vehicles under the bridge to be trapped in the hail, and seriously hindered the normal passage of other vehicles, the damage to public interests caused by this risk avoidance behavior has clearly exceeded the protected private interests.

4. Subjective avoidance intention requires the perpetrator to have a legitimate objective of avoiding significant loss of legitimate rights and interests subjectively. It is difficult to determine the legitimacy of protecting one's own property rights at the expense of others' property rights and traffic congestion in the Beijing hail incident.

In terms of administrative responsibility, according to Articles 56 and 99 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, motor vehicles should be parked at designated locations, and temporary parking must not obstruct the passage of other vehicles and pedestrians; Those who illegally intercept motor vehicles and refuse to listen to dissuasion, causing serious traffic congestion or significant property damage, shall be fined between 200 yuan and 2000 yuan, and may be detained for up to 15 days. According to statistics from the Beijing Traffic Management Bureau, on the evening of May 13th, there were 243 cases of traffic violations caused by illegal parking and avoidance, which essentially violated road traffic safety regulations.

In terms of civil liability, Article 182 of the Civil Code stipulates that if the measures taken for emergency avoidance are improper or exceed the necessary limits, causing undue damage, the emergency avoidance party shall bear appropriate civil liability. In the hail incident in Beijing, the collective violation of parking by vehicles resulted in the rear vehicles being forced to stay in the hail for 2 hours. In this situation, the evacuees may need to bear civil liability for the losses of the blocked car owners.

The trigger point for criminal responsibility is higher, but it is not non-existent. According to Article 21 of the Criminal Law, if emergency avoidance exceeds the necessary limit and causes undue harm, criminal responsibility shall be borne, but the punishment shall be reduced or exempted. In the hail incident in Beijing, if emergency vehicles are unable to pass due to illegal parking and cause casualties, or lead to major accidents such as multiple vehicle collisions, the perpetrator may be held accountable for the crime of traffic accident.