What is the legal basis for all the compensation for the upstairs residents who were injured by things falling from the upstairs?

If you are injured by something falling from upstairs, the legal basis for all residents upstairs to compensate is the Tort Liability Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC).

Article 87 of the Tort Liability Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that if an object thrown from a building or falling from a building causes damage to others, and it is difficult to determine the specific infringer, in addition to proving that he is not an infringer, the user of the building who may have caused the damage shall make compensation.

Article 126 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that owners and managers of buildings or other facilities, as well as shelving and hanging objects on buildings, shall bear civil liability if they collapse or fall off or cause damage to others, except those who can prove that they are not at fault.

Extended data:

Falling object case: who is right and who is wrong?

A few days ago, the people's court of Jinghu District, Wuhu City, Anhui Province held a hearing on a falling object case. A man riding an electric car was suspected to have been hit in the back of the head by a red brick falling from the air and died on the spot. After the incident, because the perpetrator could not be found, the victim's family took the owners of 96 households 176 on the 32nd floor of the building, as well as the property management company and development company in the community to court. The victim appealed and decided that each defendant should compensate the plaintiff for various losses totaling 52,6671yuan. (July 30, Legal Evening News)

The Tort Liability Law stipulates that if an object thrown from a building or an object falling from a building causes damage to others, and it is difficult to determine the specific infringer, in addition to being able to prove that he is not an infringer, the user of the building who may have caused the damage shall pay compensation. In China, tort cases generally follow the principle of fault liability: whoever advocates proof and the victim requests legal relief must first prove that the other party is at fault. But on some special issues, such as falling objects, the burden of proof is reversed. The law first presumes that the actor is at fault, and the actor needs to prove that he is not at fault, so there are so many defendants.

This sounds a bit overwhelming. Assuming that some residents have been resting at home or going out for a walk alone, how can they prove that they did not have the possibility of parabolic at that time? Suppose again, if someone does throw things intentionally or negligently, or if an outsider commits a crime, is it possible to evade or reduce the responsibility? The victim's family may get timely compensation, but it is unfair to compensate the victim through the self-economic damage of civil society.

In China's administrative litigation, if an individual claims to the court that the administrative subject is at fault, then the defendant needs to provide evidence to prove his innocence, which is what we often call "people's accusation". Because in reality, it is more difficult for individuals to obtain evidence than powerful administrative subjects; However, some defendants in the high-altitude parabolic case, like the victims, are ordinary people, and their status can be said to be equal. The inversion of the burden of proof has increased the responsibility of some defendants to a certain extent, and added "unwarranted" charges to some people. From this perspective, harshness is inevitable.

However, nothing is perfect, and so is the law. Tort law should be based on judicial practice and judicial efficiency. In practice, if it is handled like other infringement cases, it will form a one-to-many complex situation. I am afraid that it will take a lot of manpower and material resources for the families of the victims to collect the evidence of nearly 200 defendants, and they may not get compensation in the end. In addition, for the police, there is no monitoring equipment at the scene, and the investigation work is difficult. If the perpetrators don't confess voluntarily, it can be said that they are looking for a needle in a haystack. Therefore, the provisions of tort law can be said to be based on practical expediency.

It is the direction of the rule of law construction in China to let the people feel fairness and justice in every judicial case. Although residents of high-rise buildings have a higher duty of care than victims, it is a bit difficult for all residents to prove their innocence. In order to break this dilemma, the author believes that, first of all, appropriate adjustments can be made in legislation; Secondly, the property and developer companies of high-rise buildings can try to install camera monitoring in the peripheral areas to solve the problem of difficulty in obtaining evidence, and can also provide relevant insurance for owners to reduce economic losses; In addition, high-rise residents should be more vigilant, standardize their behavior and guard against danger.

People's Network-Who is right or wrong about the responsibility of falling objects from high altitude?