Home Sports 8-year-old child crossed the 7-year-old child to play the slide first, but was pushed and fell, and the disabled parents were responsible for 30% of their own responsibility | Child | Injury | Guardian

8-year-old child crossed the 7-year-old child to play the slide first, but was pushed and fell, and the disabled parents were responsible for 30% of their own responsibility | Child | Injury | Guardian

by admin
8-year-old child crossed the 7-year-old child to play the slide first, but was pushed and fell, and the disabled parents were responsible for 30% of their own responsibility | Child | Injury | Guardian

When an 8-year-old child was playing a slide in the restaurant’s children’s play area, he wanted to slide down first because he couldn’t wait to cross the 7-year-old child who was playing with him, but he was pushed by the 7-year-old child and fell and became disabled. How to divide the liability for compensation ?

On June 14, Peng Mei News learned from the Nanhu District Court of Jiaxing City, Zhejiang Province that the court recently concluded the case of the minor causing damage to others. The guardian of the infringing party was sentenced to bear 70% of the responsibility, and the guardian of the infringed party was sentenced to bear 30% of the responsibility. responsibility.

In February 2021, 8-year-old Xiaojun (pseudonym) and his mother went to a fast-food restaurant for dinner, and then played in the entertainment area of ​​the fast-food restaurant, during which 7-year-old Xiaoliang (pseudonym) also played in the area. When Xiaojun and Xiaoliang were playing on the slide at the same time, Xiaoliang sat high on the slide and did not slide down in time. Xiaojun couldn’t wait to step over Xiaoliang’s body and prepare to slide down first. Seeing this, Xiaoliang reached out and pushed Xiaojun, causing Xiaojun to fall from the upper side of the slide to the ground and get injured. Xiaojun’s mother heard Xiaojun’s cries and immediately ran to the entertainment area of ​​the fast food restaurant to send Xiaojun to the hospital for treatment. Xiaojun underwent two surgeries in the hospital successively. After judicial appraisal, Xiaojun’s injury level was rated as a tenth-level disability of human injury.

See also  US media investigation: US military accidentally killed innocent civilians without killing terrorists in Kabul air raid_Ahmadi

Xiaojun’s parents believed that Xiaoliang’s behavior of pushing Xiaojun off the slide and the fast food restaurant’s lack of safety in the amusement area caused Xiaojun to be injured. They then sued Xiaoliang’s parents and the fast food restaurant involved in the Nanhu Court, requesting The two defendants jointly compensate Xiaojun for more than 190,000 yuan in medical expenses, hospitalization expenses, and spiritual comfort funds.

The court held that 8-year-old Xiaojun is a person with limited capacity for civil conduct, and Xiaoliang, 7 years old, is a person without capacity for civil conduct. If a person with limited or no capacity for civil conduct causes damage to others, the guardian shall bear the tort liability. When two people play in the entertainment area of ​​the fast food restaurant, they should be led by their guardians and be responsible for their safety, but the guardians did not follow and take care of them and did not fulfill their duty of guardianship. Xiaojun did not follow the order when using the slide facilities, and used the slide to slide down over Xiaoliang, which has a causal relationship with the result of his injury. When Xiaoliang was using the slide facility, he failed to slide down in time, and when Xiaojun stepped over his body and was about to slide down, he stretched out his hand and pushed him, causing Xiaojun to fall from the upper side of the slide to the ground and be injured. The court determined that Xiaojun’s medical expenses and hospitalization expenses totaled more than 153,000 yuan in this case. Xiaoliang’s parents should bear 70% of the responsibility in this incident, and Xiaojun’s parents should bear 30% in this incident. responsibility. Although the fast food restaurant has a warning sign on the wall on the side of the entrance of its play area, it has not managed the area accordingly, and did not stop Xiaojun and Xiaoliang from entering the playground without adult supervision. Therefore, the fast food restaurant bears secondary responsibility for the occurrence of Xiaojun’s injury. In this case, it belongs to the infringement of the third party, and the court determined as appropriate that the fast food restaurant should bear 30% of the supplementary liability within the scope of the third party’s tort liability.

See also  Inter, De Vrij injury: muscle distraction. Skip the Turin

The Paper learned from the Nanhu Court that, according to the relevant provisions of the Civil Code, the operator, manager or organizer of the business premises, as a third party, fails to fulfill the obligation of safety protection and assumes corresponding supplementary responsibilities. The supplementary liability that the fast food restaurant involved in this case should undertake, that is, when the main responsible person, Xiao Liang’s parents, cannot bear all the compensation liabilities, because he is a party with a specific connection with Xiao Liang’s parents, he is indirectly responsible for the part that Xiao Liang’s parents cannot pay according to law. If the fast food restaurant fulfills the above-mentioned supplementary responsibility for compensation, it has the right to claim compensation from Xiaoliang’s parents.

It is reported that after the court’s judgment, Xiaoliang’s parents have paid more than 100,000 yuan in compensation to Xiaojun’s parents, and both the plaintiff and the defendant have served the judgment. The procedure for fulfilling the supplementary responsibilities that the fast food restaurant should undertake has not started.

The Paper reporter Ge Rongjin correspondent Chen Ying

Original title: 8-year-old child crossed the 7-year-old child to play the slide first, but was pushed and fell and disabled, and the parents were responsible for 30%

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy