A man owns more than 16,000 square meters of factory buildings, he rented to a shoe company, he thought that he could collect rent to get rich, but he did not expect a fire to destroy his factory, the factory lost more than 2,000 yuan, but he did not wait for compensation, but was sued by the tenant, and the result of the court he could not accept.
Mr. Huang is full of pride in owning such a large factory, and in 2014, he successfully rented the factory to a shoe company, and since then he has been living on a steady rent, even if he lies flat, he is more comfortable than many people.
But he didn't expect that after only six years of renting the house, something happened.
In January 2020, a fire broke out in the factory, and the raging fire engulfed the entire factory.
At that time, Mr. Huang was also very heartbroken when he saw the fire, which was enough to destroy his factory.
Sure enough, after the fire was extinguished, the factory was burned down and became desolate and worthless.
The factory building is his hard work, and it cost him more than tens of millions of yuan to build the factory at the beginning, although the fire was not caused by him, but he is still very heartbroken.
However, what made him even more heartbroken was that he was still stupidly waiting for the tenant to take responsibility for this matter and compensate him so that he could rebuild the factory, but who knows, the result he waited for was a summons, the tenant sued him, demanding compensation from him, and Mr. Huang was stunned.
But he didn't panic, because he had already rented the factory to the tenant, and there had been no problem for six years, and the fire was not caused by himself, so he felt that even if the tenant sued him, it would be useless.
Because the cause of this fire was that the tenant subleased the factory to four enterprises without permission, and set up an inspection table without permission, which caused an electric fire.
However, the judgment resulted in Mr. Huang compensating the footwear company 25% and the footwear company paying 75% to Mr. Huang.
Since the loss of Mr. Huang's factory is more than 2,000 yuan, and the loss of the factory is more than 95.6 million yuan, that is, Mr. Huang has to compensate the agreement company for more than 10 million yuan.
Naturally, Mr. Huang could not accept this result, and he quickly appealed to the tenant for compensation.
So can Mr. Huang's appeal be supported?
In this case, the key to whether Mr. Huang's claim can be upheld depends on who is at fault in this case.
Article 1165 of the Civil Code stipulates that if the actor infringes on the civil rights and interests of others and causes damage due to his fault, he shall bear tort liability.
Where it is presumed that the actor is at fault in accordance with the provisions of law, and he cannot prove that he is not at fault, he shall bear tort liability.
Since the cause of the fire was caused by the tenant's unauthorized erection of the inspection table, this is a problem between the person who erected the inspection without permission and the tenant, and it is an agreement between them, and it has nothing to do with Mr. Huang, and Mr. Huang is not at fault.
Since Mr. Huang was not at fault in this case, the tenant should not hold Mr. Huang for compensation, but the tenant should compensate Mr. Huang for his losses. #数千万厂房被烧反赔租客千万#, what are your thoughts on this?
