Is CMC responsible for concealing "swallowing up" young children's residential property?

3-year-old, full of curiosity, is exploring this colorful world with actions, but a hidden manhole and the negligence of a parent have stopped the young life. ...

At 3 pm on the 27th, the Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People's Court (hereinafter referred to as Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People's Court) held a public hearing to hear the appeal of the dispute over the right to life, and delivered a verdict in court. It ordered the residential property management company to bear 60% of the compensation liability and compensate the parents of young children for various losses totaling 8 1 1,000 yuan.

Grandma went to the toilet and her granddaughter fell into the manhole and drowned.

Jin Zhong and Su Hong are husband and wife. They have two daughters, the youngest of whom is Yuan Yuan, who has just turned 3. Every day, Jin Zhong is busy with business, and the young Yuanyuan is taken care of by her mother and grandmother. However, an accident broke the peace of the family. ...

20 18, 18 On a weekend in June, grandma played alone with Yuanyuan near the flower bed downstairs in the community. Soon, grandma suddenly wanted to go to the toilet and saw Yuanyuan having a good time. She thought it was close to her door, so she hurried back and left Yuanyuan to play alone. Unexpectedly, just a few minutes after grandma left, Yuanyuan accidentally fell into the manhole of the green belt of the community and died after being rescued. This round of accidents plunged the whole family into great sorrow.

Repeated mediation failed. Parents shall be held accountable for property.

Yuan Yuan's parents, Jin Zhong and Su Hong, think that the management of the residential property management company is not in place, and the manhole without manhole cover in the residential area is not provided with effective guardrail warning or timely replacement, which leads to Yuan Yuan falling into the manhole pool and drowning, and should bear the main responsibility. In many consultations with the property management company, the two sides have great differences and no mediation has been reached. The husband and wife then filed a lawsuit in court, demanding that the property management company bear 80% of the liability for the accident.

After trial, the court of first instance held that Yuan Yuan's parents failed to fulfill their guardianship duties and were heavily responsible for the accident. However, the property management company failed to fulfill its security obligations for the hidden dangers of green plants, and should bear tort liability for this. According to the fault degree of both parties, the court ruled that the property management company should bear 20% compensation responsibility and compensate more than 270,000 yuan. Yuan Yuan's parents refused to accept the verdict and appealed to the Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People's Court.

It is difficult to find manhole in the green belt. The second instance was changed to property infringement and assumed the main responsibility.

In the second trial, Yuanyuan's parents claimed that the property management company should bear 80% of the main responsibility for the accident; The property management company believes that the manhole was covered with green plants and fallen leaves for a long time, which was difficult for the company to detect, and the Yuanyuan family acted on its own, leading to the accident, and the guardian should bear the main responsibility.

So how to determine the responsibility ratio of both parties? Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People's Court held that the property management company was responsible for managing the security and property maintenance services of the community. The company has no objection to the facts identified in the first instance, and also recognizes that the manhole involved is used for sewage discharge in the community and does not belong to municipal public facilities. As a property manager, he failed to find or eliminate the potential safety hazard in the manhole in time, which led to Yuanyuan falling into the manhole and drowning. Now the property management company has failed to prove that it has fulfilled its management responsibility and should bear the corresponding tort liability. At the same time, the guardian of the circle is also at fault for the accident. This case applies the principle of negligence offset to reduce the tort liability of the property management company. Considering the fault degree of both parties and the cause of the accident, Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People's Court ruled that the property management company should bear 60% of the compensation liability for the accident.

Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People's Court said that children lack self-control ability and awareness of risk avoidance, and the "guardian" of children's safety needs to establish a sound protection mechanism. In this case, the property management company failed to fulfill its property management obligations, and the parents did not fully perform their guardianship duties as guardians, which led to the tragedy. The summer vacation is coming, and it is also a period of frequent accidents for children. Parents and managers of public places should improve their sense of responsibility to protect their children, and don't make a big mistake because of "temporary negligence".

Source: China News Network