One scene丨 Beijing an electric vehicle battery into the home charging caused a fire The manufacturer was sentenced to 90,000 yuan in compensation

On December 13, the Shijingshan Court in Beijing pronounced a judgment on the product liability dispute case due to the fire caused by the charging of electric bicycle batteries in the home.

Household charging caused a fire The contents of the home were burned

The plaintiff said: The plaintiff's family bought an electric car from a certain company in Beijing, the defendant dealership. On June 13, 2021, the plaintiff took the battery of the electric bicycle to the home to charge, and did not want the battery to suddenly catch fire and explode, resulting in a serious fire, resulting in the plaintiff's family being trapped in the fire. Although he was rescued and rescued unharmed, he was greatly frightened mentally. The fire destroyed all the items in the house, including furniture, electrical appliances, antiques, calligraphy and paintings, and so on.

The plaintiff sued a Beijing company, a dealer of electric bicycles, and a company in Jiangsu, a manufacturer of electric bicycles, to the court, demanding that the defendant manufacturer Jiangsu company compensate the plaintiff for medical expenses, battery cost losses, and various property losses totaling more than 110,000 yuan.

The defendant manufacturer, a company in Jiangsu, argued that although the electric bicycle was indeed produced by itself, it was not equipped with a battery when it was sold from the factory, the ownership of the battery that spontaneously ignited was unknown, and the fire had nothing to do with itself.

The defendant distributor, a company in Beijing, denied that there was a sales contract relationship with the plaintiff, and claimed that the goods sold by the defendant were all equipped with certificates of conformity and instruction manuals, and had fulfilled their obligation to indicate and should not be liable. At the same time, a company in Beijing, the defendant dealer, also said that it was a complete vehicle for sale.

At the trial, the plaintiff said that he also knew that he could not charge at home, but the number of public charging piles in the community was limited, and he had to charge at home.

After trial, the Shijingshan court held that although the manufacturer Jiangsu company and the seller Beijing company denied that they were related to themselves, combined with the evidence registered by the traffic management department, the photos of electric bicycles, and the opinions of the parties, it was sufficient to conclude that a dealer In Beijing company sold a complete vehicle including batteries to the plaintiff, and that the electric vehicle including batteries was produced and manufactured by a manufacturer of electric vehicles, including batteries, by a company in Jiangsu. In the event of a fire, the e-bike is still under warranty. According to the fire department, the cause of the fire was caused by the thermal runaway of the battery failure of the electric bicycle. Therefore, whether the electric bicycle involved in the case has a quality defect has become the primary core dispute in the trial of this case.

According to the law, product liability is a special kind of tort liability, regardless of whether the producer or seller is at fault, as long as it meets the constituent elements of product liability, it should bear tort liability to the victim. In the allocation of the burden of proof, the producer and seller shall bear the burden of proof as to whether the product is defective and whether there is no causal relationship between the defect and the result of the damage.

According to Article 1202 of the Civil Code, "if a defective product causes damage to others, the producer shall bear tort liability". Article 1203 stipulates that if a defective product causes damage to others, the infringed party may request compensation from the producer of the product or the seller of the product. Article 41 of the Product Quality Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "If the defective product causes damage to the person or other property other than the defective product, the producer shall bear the liability for compensation". According to the above-mentioned legal provisions, the infringed party can choose either the seller of the product or the producer of the product to claim the right. In this case, although the plaintiff sued the seller and the producer at the same time, it ultimately chose to claim rights only against the defendant manufacturer, a company in Jiangsu. Because a company in Jiangsu, the manufacturer, could not produce evidence to prove that there was no defect in the electric bicycle involved in the production or that there was no causal link between the defect and the consequences of the damage, the manufacturer Jiangsu company should bear the corresponding compensation liability.

However, the plaintiff, knowing the fire risk involved in the indoor charging of the bicycle, still brought the electric bicycle battery into the room for charging, and there should also be a certain fault for the occurrence of the fire accident and the expansion of the loss. According to Article 1173 of the Civil Code, "if the infringed party is at fault for the occurrence or expansion of the same damage, the liability of the infringer may be reduced", so the liability of a company in Jiangsu, the manufacturer, should be appropriately reduced.

In the end, the court ordered the defendant, a company in Jiangsu, to compensate the plaintiff for various losses totaling 90,000 yuan within seven days after the judgment took effect. At present, the two sides have not appealed.

The judge said: Manufacturers should strictly control quality and strictly prevent unqualified products from flowing into the market

In recent years, due to the frequent occurrence of electric bicycle fire accidents, the relevant departments have long made clear provisions on the parking of electric bicycles and charging fire prevention. The news media, street communities, residential properties, etc. have vigorously publicized and actively guided the charging and fire safety of electric bicycles. In this case, the plaintiff, as a person with full capacity for civil conduct, still took the battery home to charge it, which eventually led to a fire. Therefore, once again remind the majority of electric bicycle users, be sure to go to the designated charging place in the community for charging, do not charge the battery or electric bicycle into the home. Residential properties should reasonably allocate the number of electric vehicle charging piles in accordance with the specific conditions such as the number of people in the community and the number of electric bicycles, and at the same time, further strengthen the publicity and education of fire safety, and actively guide the majority of residents to public charging places for charging. At the same time, manufacturers and sellers of products should strictly control product quality, strictly prevent unqualified products from flowing into the market, and avoid losses to users and consumers.

Correspondent Che Yulong

Text/Beijing Youth Daily reporter Dong Zhenjie

Edit/White Dragon