During the heatstroke prevention, there are these legal knowledge points

In the past few days, high temperature weather has appeared in many places, and citizens have adopted various types of cooling methods, but these cooling methods may also involve some legal issues. For example, what kind of security obligations should be fulfilled? Will blowing air conditioners violate the rights and interests of neighbors? This newspaper has sorted out the recent jurisprudence of various courts to clarify the legal knowledge points in heatstroke and cooling.

Case 1 Air conditioning machine blows hot wind to the neighbor's home beyond the range of tolerance obligations of tolerance

The air conditioner of the neighbor's home garage is facing the bedroom. Under the high temperature weather, the noise and heat generated by the machine make Chen Mou, who lives on the first floor, and argued with the neighbors after many negotiations. Recently, the Intermediate Court of Nantong City, Jiangsu Province, made a final judgment of the first trial of the first trial of the adjacent relationship dispute.

Chen's family lived on the first floor of a community, and the garage of neighbors Yang was located downstairs in Chen's house. Yang's mother -in -law lived in the garage. In the summer of 2021, Yang installed air conditioners for the garage, and placed the air conditioner on the eaves of the garage built by itself, near the bedroom window of Chen. The heat and noise generated by the air -conditioning unit made Chen unable to disturb the air. Chen repeatedly negotiated with Yang to change the position of the air conditioner, but Yang did not agree. In desperation, Chen had to sue to Qidong City Court.

After hearing, the court believed that Yang's behavior of changing the use of the garage involved in violation of the provisions of the "Jiangsu Provincial Property Management Regulations", that is, the behavior itself was not legitimacy. Although Yang argued that the vast majority of owners in the community changed the garage to living and living, but obviously could not become the so -called habit of the country. The air conditioner installed by Yang is less than 50 cm from Chen's bedroom window, and the air conditioner will inevitably produce vibration and noise when running. Even if the air conditioner installed by Yang meets relevant national standards, it still has related impact and a certain degree of obstacles to Chen's lives, and exceeds the scope of tolerance obligations of adjacent relationships. Based on this, the court ruled that Yang was demolished the air conditioner.

Yang was dissatisfied and appealed. Nantong Intermediate People's Court maintained the original judgment.

Law link

Article 236 of the Civil Code of the Civil Code may obstruct property rights or may obstruct property rights, and the right holder may request to eliminate the danger of obstructing or eliminating the danger.

Article 272 The owner has the right to possess, use, earn, and punishment for its own building. The owner's exercise of rights must not endanger the safety of the building, and must not harm the legitimate rights and interests of other owners.

Article 288 The neighboring right holders of real estate shall properly handle adjacent relations in accordance with the principles of favorable production, convenience of life, unity, mutual assistance, and fairness. Judge

The neighboring relationship and the tolerance volunteer are irreplaceable two sides. As long as it is adjacent, there must be tolerance obligations. The tolerance obligation aims to coordinate the interests between neighboring rights, maintain the harmonious relationship between the rights, and enable the rights and obligations of the parties to be effectively balanced. Reasonable limit content. When exercising your own rights, you should try to avoid damage to the neighboring property rights. In this case, Yang installed the air conditioner and installed near the window of the neighbor's bedroom downstairs. The noise and hot air during the running of the air conditioner had affected the normal living life of the neighbor Chen, which harmed Chen's rights. The scope of tolerance obligations in neighborhoods.

According to the people's court

Case 2 Swimming Pavilion Swimming Destiny Destiny Manager's Observation Obligations of 60 %

High -temperature heat, various types of swimming fitness venues are becoming a good place for people to "ride the wind and waves", but the potential exercise risks are also easy to trigger related disputes. Recently, the Tianjin Jinnan District Court tried a case involving disputes in violation of the obligations of security guarantee.

In the summer of 2021, Zhao died unfortunately while swimming in a swimming pool. The on -site monitoring screen shows that since Zhao's body enters the water, the phenomenon of drowning has been drowned to the staff to rescue Zhao's surface for nearly 2 minutes before the staff. Although there are staff members who have recovered the cardiopulmonary recovery of Zhao after landing, Zhao was still by the hospital on the morning of the same morning. The reason for announcing death was stopping and drowning of breathing heartbeat.

Zhao's family believes that a swimming pool operator is not equipped with professional life -saving personnel and professional medical personnel in the museum, and no lifeguard inspections have been performed during the swimming swimming process. Rescue, missed Zhao's best rescue time. Then he sued a swimming pool to the court and asked him to bear the liability for compensation for Zhao's drowning death.

According to the trial, the swimming pool operator should have more cautious security obligations in response to swimming participants. The survey showed that the on -site staff at the front desk at a farther side of the drowning location at the time of the incident was not interrupted by the side of the swimming pool, and the rescue of Zhao was delayed. The obligation of security and security shall bear the corresponding compensation liability.

In addition, according to the surveillance video of the incident at the time, it was found that Zhao did not have obvious calls or struggles when the accident occurred. Combined with the hospital diagnosis, it did not rule out other factors that caused the arrest of breathing heartbeat at that time. Because Zhao's family refused to conduct an autopsy against Zhao, the real cause of difficulty determining Zhao's death, accordingly, it was determined that Zhao had a corresponding mistake in the consequences of the damage.

In summary, the court finally determined that the operator of a swimming pool bears the losses of Zhao's death by 60%of the liability of compensation.

Judge

According to the provisions of the Civil Code, the responsibility of the main body of the security guarantee obligations shall be based on its failure to fulfill the obligations of security and security, and the security guarantee obligation shall be limited to reasonable and appropriate.Judging whether the subject of security guarantee obligations have fulfilled the security obligations, it can grasp the five aspects: legal standards, industry standards, contract standards, good managers standards, and special standards.In this case, because swimming is a dangerous sports project, a swimming pool operator as a service provider has not performed the corresponding safety guarantee obligations to the swimming participants, and there is a fault for Zhao's death.

According to the rule of law

- END -