Boys drowned their parents to claim more than 30 million yuan in claims to 7 -year -old companions, lawyers: not to deal with the obligation of minors to rescue their companions

The three six or seven -year -old boys were playing with each other, and one of them was unfortunately drowned. The parents of the deceased sued a companion and their parents to the court, asking for compensation for compensation for more than 30,000 yuan, and was eventually rejected by the court. Recently, the case of the trial of the People's Court of Luyi County, Henan Province has aroused attention and discussion.

Yangzi Evening News/Zi Niu Journalist noticed that in another similar case, the companions who met the swimming were twelve or three -year -olds. The court finally judged that four companions assumed 10%of their responsibilities. Why are the judgments of these two cases different? Is the minor have a rescue obligation to peers? Yangtze Evening News/Zi Niu Journalist interviewed lawyers.

The drowning boy's parents claimed the 7 -year -old companion and were rejected by the court

At noon one day in early September 2021, Xiaoming, a 6 -year -old boy who lives in a village in Luyi County, Henan Province, and 7 -year -old Ding Ding and 6 -year -old village with 6 -year -old village. When the three went to the highway construction site near the village together, Xiaoming accidentally drowned in a puddle dug in the construction site.

After the accident, Xiaoming's parents sued Ding Ding and his parents to Luyi County People's Court in Henan Province, asking for compensation for compensation for more than 30,000 yuan.

For why the child laid off, Xiaoming's parents said that Ding Ding led Xiaoming and Zhuang Zhuang to a highway construction site near the village, and took a bath in a puddle dug at the construction site. Ding Ding's parents argued that the three were free to meet, and there were no problems organized by people. The three children would not swim, so they did not go there to take a bath. Ding Ding's parents believe that his son was only 7 years old. When he saw his partner drowning, he was frightened and did not know how to rescue him. The law did not stipulate that he had the obligation to rescue, so there was no fault.

The Luyi Court tried that the three children who played together were people with no civil abilities. The body and intellectual development were not sound. In the face of emergency emergencies, self -protection is still insufficient, and it is even more powerful to help others. He is also a person with no ability to rescue each other without legal rescue obligations. For Xiaoming's death, Ding Ding and his parents do not have any fault.

Based on this, the court finally decided to reject Xiao Ming's parents' claims. According to reports, in this case, Xiaoming's parents and construction members reached a settlement agreement and received corresponding compensation.

The boy drowned, and his companion over 12 years old was sentenced to bear a total of 10%responsibility

It is worth noting that in this case, the incident at that time was playing with Xiaoming at the age of 8 years. The Yangtze Evening News/Zi Niu Journalist retrieval of the referee document network found that for the case of life rights caused by minors to play, if other companions are people who are 8 years old, they will be restricted by civilian behavior, and the court's judgment will have different results.

The Pingjiang County People's Court of Hunan Province tried this situation in April this year. The judgment of the case shows that on the afternoon of June 1, 2021, after a primary school in Pingjiang County, Yueyang City held the June 1st Children's Day event, Binbin proposed that six twelve -year -old sixth -year boys met in a local place in a local place. Swimming and playing. After arriving at the waters, except for a small language riding a bicycle on the river embankment, the other five boys took off the river to swim. About ten minutes later, the partners found that Yang Yang and another boy were in danger, so they immediately called for help. The adults fishing here rescued another boy, but tried to rescue the ocean and drowned unfortunately.

Yangyang's parents believed that because they did not fulfill their responsibility for guardianship, they expressed their willingness to bear 50%of their responsibilities. At the same time, the other five boys and their parents sued the Pingjiang Court to request the defendant to compensate 50%of each loss caused by his son's death. That is, more than 460,000 yuan.

The court tried the case that six people including Binbin and Yangyang in this case were minors, and the accident was 12 years old. Xiaoyu rides a bicycle in the river embankment to wait for the friendly behavior of his companion, and clearly rejects the dangerous behavior of participating in the swimming of the river with practical actions, and the behavior of calling and help with his companions is not punished. Therefore, the court comprehensively determined that the small language was not fault in this case and did not bear the liability of infringement.

The court believes that although the five boys in addition to small languages ​​are limited to those who have limited behavior, they already have a certain sense of safety. They should be aware that going to the wild to swim in the wild is high. Common sense should have the obligation to protect and remind others of the health and safety of others. In this case, although the other four partners have tried to rescue and seek help from others, they cannot be exempted from the fault of the meeting and swimming in the water. They should bear the corresponding infringement liability according to law.

Binbin is the initiator of a companion to swim and should bear the liability of greater infringement than the three other three launch partners. The deceased should also foresee that it is quite dangerous to swim in the wild, but on the premise of knowing that he is not good at swimming, he still participates in swimming and causes drowning. He should bear the main responsibility for the consequences of the damage to his drowning death.

The Pingjiang Court determined that Binbin assumed 7%of responsibility as appropriate, and the three water partners except Binbin each assumed 1%of their responsibilities. Because Yangyang's parents did not fulfill their duties as guardians, they should bear most of their responsibilities for the loss caused by death. Based on this, the court ruled that Bin Bin and his guardians compensated Yang Yang's parents for more than 64,000 yuan for their son's death; the other three watershed partners and their guardians each compensated more than 9,200 yuan.

Lawyer: Do not deal with the obligations of minors to rescue companions

Regarding the legal issues involved in the cases of life rights caused by the two minors drowning, Chang Xuan, Executive Director of Jiangsu Golden Association and Law Firm, said that the Civil Code will be the boundaries of the eighth and eighteen years old. Divided into three cases. Natural persons under eight years old belong to people without civil behavior, and civil legal behavior implemented by implementation is invalid; natural persons aged eight to eighteen years old restrict civilian behaviors can independently implement purely beneficial civil legal acts or adapt to their age and intelligence. Civil legal behavior; natural persons over the age of eighteen years old can be a capable capacity for civil law, and can independently implement civil legal acts. Chang Xuan pointed out that it is important to note that in the case of life disputes hearing in Pingjiang Court, the reason for the judgment of the deceased's companions and their guardians was not not fulfilled, but that these companions should have protection. Remind others to pay attention to the health and safety of life, and determine that the companion meets the error in the water. "People without civil behavior and people who restrict civil behavior are minors. In the face of emergencies, self -rescue ability is still weak. If the obligation to help her companions is added, it may cause more serious consequences." She express.

Yangzi Evening News/Zi Niu Journalist noticed that the Pingjiang Court also made it clear in the judgment that in dealing with the right to live in the right of life due to swimming drowning, the minor initiator and the minor participating in the swimming were appropriate. The cultivation of healthy growth and safety awareness of minors is also favorable, and it has a warning significance to the family guardian of minors, and has a positive promotion of the creation of the social security environment of the minor.

Chang Xuan also told the Yangtze Evening News/Zi Niu Journalist that if an adult leads a minor to swim in the river or other natural waters, the child is dangerous, and he has the obligation to rescue. If there is no timely rescue and cause minor casualties, it is necessary to bear the corresponding liability for infringement compensation. Regarding how to prevent safety accidents such as drowning of minors, she said that the "Protection Law of the Minor" and "Family Education Promotion Law" have relevant provisions. Within the scope, education guides minors to establish a sense of safety and build a security barrier. (Minor in the text is a pseudonym)

Yangtze Evening News/Zi Niu Journalist Wan Chengyuan

Edit: Qin Xiaoyi

- END -