Case 丨 Those Things of the Civil Code (369): Who is responsible for catching a plane at the airport and falling down?

Aforementioned: This case tells a case of personal injury that occurred at an airport. A passenger was in a hurry at the airport to catch a plane, and during the trot, he was tripped by the leg of a small child in front of him and injured, which triggered a lawsuit. The victim believed that the other party should bear full responsibility, but the court held that he was careless and bore most of the responsibility.

I. Case Overview

September 10, 2021 Jiangsu Higher People's Court (2021) Su Minshen No. 3291:

The retrial applicant Wang Xuelan applied to this court for a retrial in the case of a dispute with the respondents Chen Chuhang, Hu Yan and the defendants of the first instance, Eastern Airport Group Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Eastern Airport), who were dissatisfied with the civil judgment of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court of Jiangsu Province (2020) Su 01 Min Zhong No. 3946.

Wang Xuelan applied for a retrial, saying,

Chen Chuhang suddenly stretched his foot from the left rear of Wang Xuelan's left rear to hook Wang Xuelan who was walking normally in an inverted manner, causing him to fall and be injured, Chen Chuhang failed to fulfill his duty of careful observation and care when he went backwards, and should be liable, Wang Xuelan was in a continuous, stable, and straight-line forward state, he had fulfilled his duty of reasonable observation and care for the direction of progress, there was no fault in the process of infringement, and he should not be liable, and the second-instance judgment determined the proportion of responsibility based on the ages of both parties, which was an abuse of discretion.

The court of second instance did not hold a hearing and did not form a collegial panel to hear the case, and the procedure was illegal.

3． In addition to submitting the appeal at the second instance, Wang Xuelan also submitted a material entitled "On issues in the first instance process and the appeals of the second instance", reflecting the problem of violating procedures in the first instance and applying for the addition of Chen Chuhang's father as the appellee. Requested a retrial of the case, the first- and second-instance judgments were revoked, and Chen Chuhang and Hu Yan were sentenced to bear full compensation liability and apologize in person.

2. The Court's view

1． Where the perpetrator infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others due to fault, he shall bear tort liability. If the infringed party is also at fault for the occurrence of the damage, the liability of the infringer may be reduced.

After viewing the video, before the incident, Wang Xuelan was behind Chen Chuhang, in order to catch up with his family who was walking in front, he accelerated and trotted past Chen Chuhang, just when Chen Chuhang turned around and chatted with his friends, and his right heel hooked Wang Xuelan, causing Wang Xuelan to fall and be injured.

At the time of the incident, the airport waiting hall was densely staffed, Wang Xuelan was old, suddenly accelerated and trotted forward under the weight situation, did not pay attention to observe the movement of pedestrians in front, lost his balance after the foot and Chen Chuhang hooked, resulted in a fall, and Wang Xuelan was subjectively at fault for the occurrence of the accident; Chen Chuhang did not pay attention to observing the surrounding environment in the process of walking in the crowded area, and the foot hook with Wang Xuelan, who was overtaking behind, was also the cause of the accident.

The second-instance judgment, combined with the degree of fault of both parties, ordered Wang Xuelan to bear 60% of the responsibility and reduced Chen Chuhang's responsibility accordingly, which had a factual and legal basis and was not improper.

According to the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Authorizing the Supreme People's Court to Carry Out the Pilot Reform of the Diversion of Complicated and Simplified Civil Procedure in Some Areas, the second-instance court in this case belongs to the pilot court for the reform of the diversion of complicated and simplified civil litigation procedures, and the second-instance trial is heard by the judges by means of questioning, which meets the requirements of the decision and the provisions of the law, and is not improper, and Wang Xuelan's claim that the second-instance procedure is illegal cannot be established.

3． After investigation, Wang Xuelan submitted a material on "issues in the process of the first instance and appeals of the second instance" during the second instance trial, which mainly reflected the problem of the misconduct of the judge of the first instance, and proposed to add Chen Chuhang's father as a co-defendant, Chen Chuhang and his parents to apologize, and to require the appellee to appear in court, etc. In view of the fact that the materials were not submitted during the appeal period but after the court inquired, its content was not aimed at the issues of the facts and the application of law in the first-instance judgment, while Wang Xuelan requested chen Chuhang's father to be added as a co-defendant during the second-instance trial The apology by Chen Chuhang and his parents is not based on law, and the request to the appellee to appear in court also illegally sets the grounds for appeal, the second-instance judgment did not deal with the material, and there was no impropriety, wang Xuelan claimed that the second-instance judgment omitted its claims, and had no factual and legal basis.

Wang Xuelan's application for retrial was rejected.