The old man was good at entering the construction of the construction house and caused a disability, and claimed the homeowner!The court was sentenced

Pick up waste

Can obtain economic income

Can enrich the elderly life

but

There must be a boundary ...

Good at entering the house to pick up waste products

When Qiao Mou picked up a waste carton in a community in Fangshan District, Beijing, a decoration worker went to the garbage dump to dump the decoration garbage, and Qiao followed the workers to Room 101 in a unit in the community. houses.

After entering the house, Qiao accidentally fell to the basement on the right side of the door, causing injury. After identification, Qiao made up tenth -level disability.

Later, Mr. Chu, the owner of the house to the People's Court of Fangshan District, the owner of the house, asked Mr. Chu to compensate for medical expenses, residential food subsidies, disabled compensation, mental damage comfort, and appraisal fee.

It is understood that Mr. Chu is the owner of Room 101, the house involved in the case, and the house is equipped with a negative basement.

Mr. Chu entrusted a decoration company in Beijing to decorate the house. When Joe fell, there were no staircases between the first floor of the house and the basement.

Qiao believes that before the decoration of the house, the community heating company works here. She has been here several times, and there is no staircase hole on the right side of the door.

Qiao Mou said that Mr. Chu opened the staircase in the house after purchasing a house without taking security measures. After buying a house, Mr. Chu did not informed the public that he did not transform public places into private houses. Therefore, Mr. Chu's risk of opening the staircase of the building really existed for anyone who thought the house was still a public place. In the process of renovation, Mr. Chu had the occurrence of dangerous results, and there was a fault on the occurrence of damage. He should be liable for compensation.

Words indicate not to enter

During the trial, the decoration worker Lu appeared in court to testify. Before the incident, Lu installed a weak electric box behind the house, and no one called Qiao Mou entered the house. When Qiao found that Qiao entered the room, he had explicitly indicated that non -decoration staff could not enter and let Qiao go out.

Mr. Chu said that he was the property owner of the house, but did not implement any infringement, and had no causal relationship with the result of damage. He asked the decoration workers that no one agreed to enter the decoration house at the time, and Qiao broke in without authorization.

Mr. Chu believes that the house is a private house, not a public place, nor the place where he operates, so he does not have the obligation to security.

The consequences of disability to bear yourself

After trial, the Fangshan District People's Court of Beijing believes that the perpetrators violate the civil rights and interests of others for faults and shall bear the liability for infringement.

In this case, Qiao entered Chu's house without permission, and because of accidental injuries, Qiao did not provide evidence to prove that Chu had performed infringement. In this regard, Qiao should bear the responsibility of the occurrence of damage consequences. Essence

In the end, the court decided to reject Qiao's claim.

Referee analysis

Article 1,160, paragraph 1 of the "People's Republic of China" stipulates: "If a perpetrator causes damage to the civil rights and interests of others due to fault, it shall bear the liability for infringement."

This is the principle of fault liability in infringement liability. It uses fault as a value judgment standard to determine whether the perpetrator's damage to the damage should bear the principle of blame for infringement liability. In accordance with the principle of fault liability, the establishment of the liability for infringement must have four requirements: illegal acts, damage facts, causal relationships, and subjective faults. The lack of one cannot constitute the liability for infringement.

In this case, Qiao entered the house of others without permission, and picked up the property that was still controlled by others and enjoyed everything. The behavior violated Mr. Chu's ownership and privacy.

The law must not only protect the legitimate rights and interests of the victim, but also protect the behavior of the perpetrator. Mr. Chu's private houses are not used in public places for operation.

Mr. Chu did not perform infringement on Qiao, nor did he have no intention of infringement. The lack of the above -mentioned blame requirements could not cause Mr. Chu to constitute the liability for infringement. Therefore, the court made the above judgment.

Source: CCTV today, Beijing Fangshan Court

- END -