If compensation is determined, what impact will it have on society in the future?
On the contrary, did the defendant change to the plaintiff and claim compensation from the family of the deceased?
Is there a legal basis?
A couple rented with several people. His wife, Xiong, noticed that someone was peeking while taking a bath, and then shouted. When the husband hurried out to check, he found that Li, who was renting the same room, ran from the bathroom to the single room he rented, and couldn’t get out of the room behind closed doors.
The couple immediately notified the landlord and called the police. After the police arrived, they informed Li to open the door and did not get a response. In the early hours of the morning, someone discovered that Li had fallen to his death. Li’s family subsequently sued Xiong and the landlord to the court for a claim of 889,000 yuan.

If this matter is placed a few years ago, it may end with a sum of money from the landlord (note: it is compensation, not compensation). It’s impossible now. The specific reasons are finally said. Do you remember the roast lamb incident? An incident that dragged a high-quality domestic animation down the quagmire. A 9-year-old kid in Lianyungang tied up a 5-year-old and an 8-year-old to grill because he imitated the story in Pleasant Big Big Wolf. Cause severe burns to children. (However, there is no story of roasting sheep, and the evidence provided is malicious editing, which is also the key to the success of Original Dynamics.) Parents of children (hereinafter referred to as parents) should be guided by experts to spread the culture of Guangdong Original Dynamics, the production company of Pleasant Goat and Big Big Wolf. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Original Power Company) initiated a lawsuit. I insisted that it was because I watched Pleasant Goat that the kid’s roasting sheep was induced. Original Power Company is fully responsible. At a time, public opinion also flew up. In the end, Original Dynamics won the case. The parents admitted to making false accusations for the money. But the original power company is out of humanitarian care. Give parents 850,000 compensation. At this time, all kinds of bad media began to behave. The result was tampered with privately, because the original power company gave compensation. It was written that the original power company took the initiative to plead guilty and compensated 850,000. Compensation, compensation. One word difference. The slightest loss is a thousand miles away. Original Power Company suffered huge losses. The quality of Pleasant Goat and Big Big Wolf is not satisfactory for various reasons. The heat continued to drop. Now the sound is really small. (By the way, the rumors have never been banned!) I don’t know whether Original Dynamics will regret the compensation of 850,000 to the parents. But I know that no one has ever experienced similar incidents from now on, and a company dared to make humanitarian compensation for the hot incident. Scared. I’m really scared. So if this incident is not the title party, and there will be a reversal in the follow-up, I think it may be the same act of attempting to be compensated. Compensation was originally humanitarian care. However, the results will be tampered with by third parties with ulterior motives, that is, some bad media. I believe that as long as the incident is based on the deceased being the most serious and the deceased is the landlord and tenant, the landlord finally compensated. The bad self-media rhythm will be brought to the court.

zhiwo

By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
helpmekim
8 months ago

Title party ah title party. (The title has been revised. The original title was “The man accidentally fell to death because he watched the young woman take a bath, and his family claims 889,000 yuan, should he pay for it?”) Looking at this title, I thought it was a man crawling on the edge of the window to watch the young woman take a bath. I accidentally fell down when I saw that it was difficult to hold on. But the content of the news report is: one night when the wife was taking a bath in the bathroom, she felt that someone was peeping, and the husband saw the neighbor Li hurriedly ran back to his room from the bathroom, so the couple told the incident. The landlord and report to the police. After the police arrived at the scene, they asked Li to open the door for questioning, but Li did not respond. In the early hours of the morning, someone discovered that Li had fallen and died; after Li died, his family sued the husband and wife and the landlord for damages of 889,000 yuan. Of course there should be no compensation for this situation! Infringement is one of the elements of tort liability. Whether it is the landlord’s reporting to the police or the police’s knocking on the door for questioning, it must not be regarded as a tort. Without infringement, there should be no tort liability, and there should be no compensation for damages. What is even more shocking is that the family members of the peeping man are embarrassed to go to litigation for compensation? Can the law encourage voyeurism?

heloword
8 months ago

If his parents didn’t give birth to him, he would not fall to his death. He should seek compensation from his parents. If the house is not built this high and only one floor is built, he will not fall to death, and he should seek compensation from the builder. If the ground is not concrete, but soft cotton, he will not fall to death. He should seek compensation from the urban construction company. If…..really, whoever is dead is justified? Of course, this situation cannot be compensated. After reading news reports, after the wife was voyeurized taking a bath, the couple notified the landlord and called the police. After the police arrived, they informed Li to open the door and did not get a response. In the early hours of the morning, someone found that Li fell to his death. Whether it is notifying the landlord to call the police or telling the police to open the door, it is an act of legitimately safeguarding the interests of the peeped person, and there is no threat or infringement of the goods that jumped off the building. I was voyeurized and took a bath. I notified the landlord and called the police to call the police. The voyeur jumped off the building and died, but I, the voyeur, had to lose money. My old lady was peeked by you and didn’t ask you for compensation. Instead, you took the initiative to stretch out your hand and ask for money. Is that fair? And I personally think that humanitarian compensation can also be exempted. It is really ruining the three views. Did Liang Jingru bring the courage to spy on the male family member to court?

Last edited 8 months ago by greatword
helpyme
8 months ago

Peeping behavior is a serious violation of public order and good customs, and should be despised and attacked by the whole society; the peeping person commits a crime, subjectively attempts to evade legal investigation and chooses to slip through the window to meet unexpectedness; the peeping person has impure subjective motives, improper behavior, and consequences Conceited; the police is a legitimate act of defending their rights and interests, and the court should support it; the family members of the peeping person are malicious in asking for sky-high compensation, and there is suspicion of extortion. The court only gives serious criticism and education out of humanitarian concern;

sina156
8 months ago

I think the landlord can sue the family of the deceased for compensation for the loss of the depreciation of the house, because you committed suicide in the house and become a “bad house.”

In addition, I think young couples can also sue for mental damages, because they were peeped and they did not dare to sleep at night, so they sue for compensation for mental damages.

yahoo898
8 months ago

Until there is a lack of disclosure of the circumstances of the specific case, the way the problem is expressed cannot escape the suspicion of “imposing cause and effect.” Don’t talk about how to deal with the man’s prior voyeurism (the deceased cannot be held accountable), only that the door of the man’s room was closed when the man fell, and the young woman and her husband were not by his side at all. Is it difficult to connect the occurrence of the damage to the behavior of the couple? If we give another more extreme but similar example. Suppose a man is peeping at a beautiful woman, and the beautiful woman does nothing to him. Because of his excitement, the man’s heartbeat speeds up to a burst, and then the person passes by. Is this to be blamed on the beautiful woman? As for the landlord, if it is said that the room he provided has serious safety hazards, which caused the man to fall to death, then we can also discuss the landlord’s responsibility, but there is no evidence to prove this point. In fact, the landlord, like the couple, faced the closed door of the deceased, and the landlord and the deceased had no contact at the time of the incident. But again, because the evidence is insufficient, it is impossible to make an accurate judgment now. As I said above, how the man’s fall happened and whether it was related to the hidden safety hazard of the room itself, this also needs to be investigated, and it is not possible to say anything at present.

Last edited 8 months ago by greatword
leexin
8 months ago

There is such a kind of people in society, they like pond fish and forest trees very much, and their roots are implicated. Whether you have any problems or not, you will involve others. Even if this mistake has nothing to do with you, you must be the last to take this responsibility. But it is a pity that the Li family can’t play at this point at all! Moreover, he did not make his own wishful thinking. After Li fell from the building and died, instead of putting the matter down and disappearing, he became famous and well-known. As a result, these companies have become the biggest victims. If this mess can be settled, the Li family will not take the Xiongs and the landlord to court. Even if they have evidence to prove that Xiong and the landlord are guilty, they don’t have to find themselves boring and humiliate themselves. After all, this matter was Li’s fault first. Therefore, the Li family’s claim is not only unreasonable, but it is very likely that it will not receive compensation. It’s just a cat crying and a mouse fake mercy! Despite the facts, Xiong’s couple and the landlord may not be able to completely turn passive into active. They also need evidence to prove that Li’s death is related to the peeping of Xiong and Li’s death has nothing to do with Xiong and his wife. Otherwise, it’s justified and unclear. From this we can see that it is best to “do it by yourself”. Even if others say there is a “problem”, it is impossible to get confused. As long as you persist in doing the calculations patiently and carefully, you will be able to sort out the messy accounts. Once you are really furious and deliberately retaliate, you can give up all your previous efforts!

greatword
8 months ago

In Wenzhou, Zhejiang, a young couple and Li rented two houses in a community. Except for the bedroom, the kitchen and bathroom are shared. One night, the woman in the young couple, Xiong, found someone outside while taking a bath in the bathroom. Taking a peek and shouting in panic, her husband Chen came out to check the situation at this time, and just found that Li next door ran out of the bathroom. After discussing, the two decided to call the police. After the police arrived at the scene, they asked Li in the room to open the door for understanding, but Li did not hear any response. Until early in the morning, someone found Li fell from the room and died. The family members of the deceased asked the landlord and the husband and wife to pay compensation and filed a lawsuit to the court for a claim of 889,000 yuan. According to the content of the news report found on the webpage, it is known that the family of the deceased is asking the landlord and the couple to compensate for the losses. How many bamboo shoots, this compensation claim. The reason for requesting the landlord to compensate for the losses is nothing more than that the landlord is the owner of the house and has the obligation to guarantee security, and should protect the personal and property safety of the tenant, and so on. The reason for requesting compensation for both husband and wife may be…to make up the number of people? If the court verdict is established. Yes, in the future, the landlord will have to place a safety warning sign that prohibits peeping and climbing on the periphery of the wall, and he has to sign a letter of commitment with the tenant. Tenants should be fully armed when they take a bath, and they should not yell when they are spied to prevent the spyers from being frightened and leaving the world in a panic. How ridiculous. However, I did find similar cases. As a result, the landlord assumed part of the compensation liability. In this case, if the husband and wife did not act deliberately or negligently, they personally believe that no compensation is required. As a person with full capacity for civil conduct, Li (the deceased) should perform the corresponding duty of care for his own safety, and eventually fell to his death. Li should bear the main responsibility for this. As for the landlord, if he can’t prove that he has taken measures to avoid the danger, it is really a disaster from heaven.

loveyou
8 months ago

I don’t think this should be compensated. The man who peeked at him has violated social morality. This incident itself, his own behavior, there is a possibility of being discovered, which will lead to it being condemned by morals and public opinion. Before doing this, he had already risked being discovered, then after that, he had to bear joint and several liability. I don’t know the specific basis for the man who fell to his death and his family’s claim? I think that for this matter, neither the landlord nor the young woman who is taking a shower should not pay this money.

strongman
8 months ago

The voyeurism is wrong. From the text, the person concerned confirmed that the deceased had a high probability of voyeurism. Why did the deceased fall from the building? Why did the climbing of the windows in his room lead to death? This should have the police exit record and investigation and analysis. The police did not open the door after they arrived. Then why did the police exit the police and left without opening the door? The police will determine whether it is a criminal case or an accident, but the article does not say that it is just a subjective guess. There are details that should be known objectively. What did Xiong and his wife do besides knocking at the door, such as whether there was excessive verbal behavior, or the act of beating the door quickly and violently. A series of external behaviors may cause the deceased to flee because of fear and shame The possibility of accidental death. Of course, perhaps Xiong and his wife did not do anything, it was purely the result of the deceased’s personal behavior. Therefore, the basic facts are not known, nor are the police announcements, but only what one of the parties said is known, so it is not easy to comment. Now that the family members have filed a lawsuit, wait for the verdict. You can also know more details.

stockin
8 months ago

The question was re-edited a day later. According to the new information, it is probably that the couple suspected that the man took a peek at the bath and then called the police. The police came to the door and found that the man had fallen and died. The family of the man sued the woman who took the bath and the landlord… The reason for the lawsuit should be infringement. However, the four elements of infringement cannot be put together. One is that there is no causal relationship, the other is that the woman is not at fault, and the third is that there is no infringement (the act of reporting to the police is not an act in the sense of infringement). The landlord is even more unjust. Violated the duty of safety protection in public places? A rental room is not considered a public place, that is, the windows are not pressed against the anti-theft window and can not effectively prevent people from jumping the window? The following is the original answer. When answering, only the title has no specific case. This is not necessarily true for the first two years. After all, human death is big but now, don’t even want to pay a penny to the Civil Code as soon as the Civil Code comes out. Kazuki is the core value of ism. This kind of behavior that violates public order and good customs is self-sustaining. The judge also cherishes feathers. No one wants to be scolded. But the premise of all this is that the follow-up is not reversed. After all, if you take a peek and dare to sue, I always feel that it is not real

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x