Tourists got out of the car and rushed to the tiger group, provoking 11 white tigers with words and actions. Recently, a shocking scene occurred in the Beijing Wildlife Park.
On October 23, beijing Daxing police received a report that some tourists violated the regulations of the beijing wildlife park and got off their cars to break into the White Tiger exhibition area without authorization, seriously disrupting the order of public places. After the police investigated and collected evidence in accordance with the law, at present, the perpetrator Jiang Mou has been criminally detained in accordance with the law, and the case is still under further investigation and trial.
On October 24, Beijing Wildlife Park issued a statement saying that the intruder was not injured due to the contact with the safety protection devices in the development zone, coupled with the timely rescue of the on-site staff. The animals in the exhibition area exit the exhibition area after the staff has driven away and returned safely to the animal house. The intruder is currently under investigation after being taken to the hospital by the local police for a physical examination.
"Leave the tiger in a daze!" "Who is to blame for what went wrong?" This matter has triggered extensive discussion among netizens. In recent years, the tragedy of tourists "dying" due to illegal disembarkation in safari parks has been staged many times.
After repeated "blood lessons", why do people still regard the rules as a child's play? What are the legal consequences for tourists to get off the bus illegally?
According to the third paragraph of Article 15 of the Tourism Law, if a tourist violates the provisions of the safety warning or does not cooperate with the measures, safety precautions and emergency disposal measures of the State in response to major emergencies, he shall bear corresponding responsibilities in accordance with law. If tourists "know that there are tigers in the mountains and prefer to travel on tiger mountains" and get off the car in the zoo in violation of the law, seriously disrupting the safety management order of the zoo, they can be punished by public security management; in the worst cases, they may be suspected of picking quarrels and provoking troubles, and can be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years, criminal detention or public surveillance.
This time there was no danger, but who can guarantee the next time? If a visitor gets off the bus illegally and is injured by a tiger, is the zoo liable?
Article 1248 of the Civil Code stipulates that if the animals of the zoo cause damage to others, the zoo shall bear tort liability; however, if it can be proved that the management duty has been fulfilled, it shall not bear the tort liability.
According to the Civil Code, the principle of presumption of fault is adopted for the harm caused by zoo animals, but as long as the zoo can prove that it has fulfilled its management duties, it does not need to bear tort liability. In this case, according to the information and videos disclosed now, the tourists got off the car and confronted the tiger without permission, which was due to the personal fault of the tourists, not the failure of the zoo to fulfill its management duties. As a person with full capacity for civil conduct, the tourist, who blatantly violates the zoo's management regulations and does not heed dissuasion, should have sufficient foresight of the danger of a short-range confrontation with bare hands, and he or she is obviously at fault. Therefore, as long as the zoo provides evidence that it has fulfilled sufficient and necessary management duties within a reasonable limit, the zoo is not liable.
If the "man-tiger confrontation" triggers a "vicious war" and the tiger is injured by tourists when attacking tourists, do tourists need to bear legal responsibility?
The first paragraph of Article 182 of the Civil Code stipulates that if damage is caused by emergency risk avoidance, the person who caused the dangerous situation shall bear civil liability. "Emergency avoidance" generally refers to the act of harming another legal interest as a last resort in order to protect the larger legal interest from the ongoing danger. Human life is priceless, and when a tiger attacks a tourist, it is an emergency act of avoidance for tourists to injure the tiger. However, if the danger of the tiger attacking the tourist is caused by the major fault of the tourist who illegally gets off the bus, the tourist who gets off the car in violation of the law shall bear the corresponding legal liability, including civil compensation liability.
If multiple people are driving together, and one of the tourists gets off the car illegally, giving the tiger a chance to take advantage of it, and the tiger rushes in from the open door and bites the other tourists in the car, who is responsible?
Article 1250 of the Civil Code stipulates that if an animal causes damage to others due to the fault of a third party, the infringed person may request compensation from the animal breeder or manager, or from a third party. After the animal breeder or manager has compensated, he has the right to recover compensation from a third party.
If other tourists in the car are bitten by a tiger because the tourist who got off the bus opened the door, he or she can choose to claim compensation from the zoo (animal keeper or manager) or the tourist who got off the car illegally. If other tourists claim compensation from the zoo, the zoo can recover compensation from the tourists who illegally got off the bus after compensation. Therefore, the ultimate liability may be the passenger who gets off the bus with gross fault.
Source: Rule of Law Daily